Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free

boingboing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 82 posts

Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free

#41

Post by crististm »

flexie wrote: post #36
DannyBee wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please cite any european decision to the contrary to support your decision ... Germany's official copyright law (which i only have english translations of, so apologies) says: "(3) The copyright on private collections of standards is not affected by section 1 and 2 if they are referred to in laws, regulations, decrees or official announcements without reproduction of their wording. In this case, the originator is obl…

I made an assertion and now it's my "job to support it"?! How is that for an assertion. Stating that everybody is not entitled to get a free copy of copyrighted material is hardly an assertion in the first place and I think you maybe have a very strong sense of entitlement if you think you should tell me what my job is ;-) I am not a German lawyer but a Danish one. The Danish copyright law doesn't have such provision…

'I made an assertion and now it's my "job to support it"?! ' - Yep - that's how it goes.

Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free

#42

Post by ThePhysicist »

belorn wrote: post #28
chalst wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like ANSI, DIN is not a branch of government, but a self-regulated non-profit institute (an e.V.) Their FAQ describes their relationship to the government: > What is the role of the government or the European Commission in standardization? > Standardization is a form of economic self-regulation, relieving the state of the responsibility for developing detailed technical specifications while ensuring that a standard r…

So let me see if I understand this right. The EU has created several safety laws that each countries must follow. The laws then in turn reference proprietary written standards by DIN, which people need to buy in order to actually follow and understand the law. Is that correct?

Yes, and no. DIN basically takes European and international norms and translates them so that they conform to the German law and can thus be used in Germany. This is not just a matter of simple translation but of adaptation since all documents issued by the European Union are published in all languages of the member states anyway. Companies could of course just take the European norms and implement them by themselves, but since adapting these norms to German law is complicated they choose to buy a certified DIN report which provides them legal security. Now you can of course argue if this service should be provided for free or not. On their website, DIN points out a few reasons why they charge money for their reports:

http://www.din.de/cmd?cmsrubid=197041&menurubricid=197041&le...

So basically it's not Germany that "threatens" the guy which published these norms, but a company suing an individual for publishing copyrighted work.

Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free

#43

Post by roel_v »

nhaehnle wrote: post #31
Tomte wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, I know, EU "law" is difficult. I happen to have a little bit of knowledge about that, because I work on safety-related systems in industrial automation, where the same legal mechanisms apply (although "my" directive is 2006/42/EG, not Directive 2001/95/EC). Legally it works like this: 1. The EU issues a directive. Directives are not directly binding (some gray areas have developed over the years) and must be im…

Thank you for the explanation. Let me offer a tl;dr: Standards bodies found a bureaucratic loophole allowing them to make their standards into de facto -law while avoiding that those standards then become part of the public domain as they ought to be. Sounds like a classic case where the law has not caught up with morality.

No, you are wrong, the whole reason the GP is so long is because EU law is much more complicated than the average nerds' vision of what law should be like (i.e., a rule-based decision tree). It is no 'loop hole', it is a fundamental feature of EU law to not be a federal system where the Commission sets the law in a uniform way across the territory.

Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free

#44

Post by Tomte »

XODsQToxwi1eOy8 wrote: post #40
ralpht54 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laws tend to be general. For example a lay might say something like: Communication between two parties needs to be secure. Now, what is secure, how do you define it? Like tomte said you have the burden of proof. One way is to say you followed a standard because standards are formulated by "experts" and thus your communication is clear. An alternative is to develop your own secure algorithm - you might have to proof t…

No, actually, you don't have the burden of proof, that's the point. If that was the case, following a US standard, say, should probably be as good a defence as following an EU standard. Instead, one particular proprietary standard is exempted from you having to prove anything, except for the fact that you do follow the standard. That special treatment is what is being criticized here. Also, laws don't cease to be law…

Doesn't change your argument (I think), but please note that the standards in question are neither "US" nor "EU".

They are International Standards (ISO, IEC) that just get reprinted (and translated) with different front matter by ANSI, DIN, BS and whatnot.

Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free

#45

Post by belorn »

ThePhysicist wrote: post #42
belorn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So let me see if I understand this right. The EU has created several safety laws that each countries must follow. The laws then in turn reference proprietary written standards by DIN, which people need to buy in order to actually follow and understand the law. Is that correct?

Yes, and no. DIN basically takes European and international norms and translates them so that they conform to the German law and can thus be used in Germany. This is not just a matter of simple translation but of adaptation since all documents issued by the European Union are published in all languages of the member states anyway. Companies could of course just take the European norms and implement them by themselves…

Is the standard referencing the law, or the law referencing the standard?

The distinction between those two are quite important.

Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free

#46

Post by Tomte »

belorn wrote: post #45
ThePhysicist wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and no. DIN basically takes European and international norms and translates them so that they conform to the German law and can thus be used in Germany. This is not just a matter of simple translation but of adaptation since all documents issued by the European Union are published in all languages of the member states anyway. Companies could of course just take the European norms and implement them by themselves…

Is the standard referencing the law, or the law referencing the standard? The distinction between those two are quite important.

The law references the standard(s), but only as optional.

See the link to the English translation of the Product Safety Act that I posted in another comment. Article 4 is relevant.

Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free

#47

Post by vadiml »

flexie wrote: post #36
DannyBee wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please cite any european decision to the contrary to support your decision ... Germany's official copyright law (which i only have english translations of, so apologies) says: "(3) The copyright on private collections of standards is not affected by section 1 and 2 if they are referred to in laws, regulations, decrees or official announcements without reproduction of their wording. In this case, the originator is obl…

I made an assertion and now it's my "job to support it"?! How is that for an assertion. Stating that everybody is not entitled to get a free copy of copyrighted material is hardly an assertion in the first place and I think you maybe have a very strong sense of entitlement if you think you should tell me what my job is ;-) I am not a German lawyer but a Danish one. The Danish copyright law doesn't have such provision…

| 100 Euro is the price of a meal at an average restaurant Wow!!! Something is rotten in the kingdom of Danemark... The life seems to be very expensive. In France it'll be like 30 Euro (3 courses and wine)

Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free

#48

Post by rmc »

DannyBee wrote: post #14
flexie wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are quoting an American ruling. This is a European case.

Please cite any european decision to the contrary to support your decision ... Germany's official copyright law (which i only have english translations of, so apologies) says: "(3) The copyright on private collections of standards is not affected by section 1 and 2 if they are referred to in laws, regulations, decrees or official announcements without reproduction of their wording. In this case, the originator is obl…

Not all countries have the nice US standard of it all being free. Frequently Irish law refers to maps that are heavily copyrighted by Irish semi-state bodies.

Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free

#49

Post by belorn »

Tomte wrote: post #46
belorn wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the standard referencing the law, or the law referencing the standard? The distinction between those two are quite important.

The law references the standard(s), but only as optional. See the link to the English translation of the Product Safety Act that I posted in another comment. Article 4 is relevant.

Thanks, but the more I read about this, the more I start to dislike it.

Just because its optional doesn't make it less of an secret law. It simply mean that the secret law can be ignored, and where those with privileged access can gain an market advantage.

Either the law makers is in fault here for making part of the law secret, or DIN should loose their copyright to the standard. You can not have laws with open and secret parts, or you creates a law enforced unfair market.

If DIN has proprietary ownership of the optional part of the law, DIN can then at their choice exclude companies at will. After all, proprietary ownership means the right to not sell a license to companies of your choice. This is clearly incompatible with a fair and free market.

In my view, the law should be rewritten so the standard is not included there. If the market want to make the standard an industry practice, or lawyers want to view it as the defined compliance to the law, then thats fine. That would mean that a competing standard writing body (or lawyer firm) could come up with a new standard, and compete in an fair and free market with the first one. As it is now, no such competition can happen since the standard is written into the actually law as a way to optional be in compliance. Thats an clear unfair advantage, and facilitates antitrust.

Re: Germany threatens to jail Carl Malamud for making the law available for free

#50

Post by flexie »

rsingel wrote: post #26
flexie wrote: post #7

If the law mandates use of (privately manufactured) safety mechanisms it doesn't mean that you are entitled to get those safety mechanisms for free. Similarly, if the law mandates that manufacturers comply with certain (privately manufactured) technical standards it doesn't mean that everybody is entitled to get a copy of those standards for free. That being said it is unfortunate that the law refers to non open stan…

What kind of citizen thinks that required legal standards can be private property and uses the word "entitled" to refer to public standards? The answer: a corporatist with no sense of the notion of public goods. This generation scares the shit out of me.

There's nothing new in this. Publishing of laws and court rulings has been a mostly private industry for a couple of hundred years - also in the US. In fact, with Internet now is the only time ever that you are able to find most laws and a large number of important court rulings for free. If you are scared of generations you should be more scared of the older ones.

Now, laws and court rulings were not copyrighted, but what good did that do before the digital age made it free to copy them. In 1790, 1890 or even 1990 you had little chance of knowing the law if you didn't buy magazines or books with laws and court rulings.

Post reply on HN