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

Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”

netzpolitik.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 228 posts

Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”

#191

Post by Zak »

zaarn wrote: post #186
Zak wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me there are three possible ways law on the internet can work, to include ill-defined hybrids between them. Please let me know if I've missed any: 1. The law where a service is hosted applies. Entities in other legal jurisdictions may not be allowed to do business with the service (e.g. run ads on it) if it doesn't follow the law where they're located. Cost: people may be able to access content that's ill…

If you do business in a country, laws of that country apply to you. Selling apps in that country would count I presume. Part of the threat from the german government was to have GPlay and Apple delete the app from german storefronts. I don't see how that is much of an issue.

In the case of Telegram, no selling takes place; the app is free.

I can get the Android version from Google's store, which is uncontroversially subject to German law because Google has physical offices and a financial presence in Germany. I can also download it from telegram.org, which to my knowledge does not have a physical or financial presence in Germany.

Germany probably has the legal authority to order Google to stop distributing the Telegram app and can use that authority to pressure Telegram. What remains unresolved is the degree to which Germany can act against Telegram directly.

Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”

#193

Post by zaarn »

Zak wrote: post #191
zaarn wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you do business in a country, laws of that country apply to you. Selling apps in that country would count I presume. Part of the threat from the german government was to have GPlay and Apple delete the app from german storefronts. I don't see how that is much of an issue.

In the case of Telegram, no selling takes place; the app is free. I can get the Android version from Google's store, which is uncontroversially subject to German law because Google has physical offices and a financial presence in Germany. I can also download it from telegram.org, which to my knowledge does not have a physical or financial presence in Germany. Germany probably has the legal authority to order Google t…

Well, it seems very much like Telegram wants to continue being on the German Play Store. And yes, Telegram is very much selling things, even if the price, at the moment is 0$. They're also going into the ad business, if you check their business web presence.

Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”

#194

Post by 2-718-281-828 »

dang wrote: post #109

We have deep respect for German and other languages, but HN is an English-language site, so posts here need to be in English. That may require waiting until a good English-language article appears, but the more significant the topic is, the more (and sooner) this is likely to happen. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Das ist jetzt unsere Seite.

Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”

#195

Post by hutzlibu »

YEwSdObPQT wrote: post #189
ailef wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That page is what I would definitely not characterize as a proper source. From the page itself: > Any attempt to estimate a total number of killings under communist regimes depends greatly on definitions, and the idea to group together different countries such as Afghanistan and Hungary has no adequate explanation. There doesn't seem to be a real consensus on what actually should be counted or not. But I'm ok with ta…

> That page is what I would definitely not characterize as a proper source Obfuscate the discussion with numbers when it entirely misses the point I was making. So I will spell it out for you. It is totally okay to bring into question the numbers and whether it happened when it comes to the crimes of the communist regimes. However if you deny the holocaust that is too much and must be criminalised. That is a double s…

"the very small amount of people that still think the Failed Austrian Artist with a Charlie Chaplin moustache might have had some good ideas."

Small amount?

He is still admired worldwide. Just not so much openly in most places. Just look, how many Hitler documentaries are still made and that you can still buy Mein Kampf worldwide.

In either case, communist organisations do regulary face prosecution in the west, as well as islamist groups.

The only "unfair" thing would maybe be, that way more symbols of nacism are forbidden and so more possibilities to prosecute - but they just have substitutes and nothing really changes.

But - the difference between communist and nazi ideology is, that communist want a better world for everyone. Nazis only for a certain race, while enslaving the "lower" races. This might be a reason, why che is more accepted (despite being a sociopath on closer look) and hitler is not.

And the holocaust is still very unique in its significance. So they quite earned their special treatment. And they are still very much alive and organizing in the underground. This is why the rules will not soften in the foreseeable future. And I do not really feel like fighting for nazi freedom, despite being more tolerant in theory. But just for the reason alone, that those hypocrites can no longer present themself as victims, I would let them legally have all their symbols, flags and conspiracy theories.

Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”

#196

Post by mannerheim »

irtigor wrote: post #188
mannerheim wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the consequence is blocking, that's completely acceptable. If the consequence is that I have to comply with the laws of 200 jurisdictions and probably more or otherwise get arrested if I step foot on their soil (or pass through their airspace), that's completely unacceptable.

Well you always have the option of not doing business in 200 countries, just because the internet made that easier it doesn't mean you must... About consequences for completely ignoring the courts that will depend on what exactly you are being accused of facilitating/doing, who's accusing you... Just as usual.

That is asinine. It's not 'doing business' in 200 countries just because I haven't blocked my website everywhere outside of America.

If somebody breaks German law, that's their problem, and this is the convention for matters outside of the Internet, too. US CBP, for instance, doesn't hold the seller responsible for complying with import laws and duties, that's the responsibility of the importer. That's because it would be enormously complex to figure out the laws of every place someone is meant to sell to, whereas the buyer only needs to know the laws of where they live.

Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”

#197

Post by irtigor »

mannerheim wrote: post #196
irtigor wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well you always have the option of not doing business in 200 countries, just because the internet made that easier it doesn't mean you must... About consequences for completely ignoring the courts that will depend on what exactly you are being accused of facilitating/doing, who's accusing you... Just as usual.

That is asinine. It's not 'doing business' in 200 countries just because I haven't blocked my website everywhere outside of America. If somebody breaks German law, that's their problem, and this is the convention for matters outside of the Internet, too. US CBP, for instance, doesn't hold the seller responsible for complying with import laws and duties, that's the responsibility of the importer. That's because it wou…

Really? I don't think so, your example doesn't even seem particularly good, the importer is the one operating in two countries and that should know what he can legally buy in one and bring to the other, this is not a particularly new concept, in the same way I don't believe telegram itself would get in trouble if someone from another country entered Germany with the app installed in their phone.

Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”

#198

Post by stereoradonc »

dang wrote: post #109

We have deep respect for German and other languages, but HN is an English-language site, so posts here need to be in English. That may require waiting until a good English-language article appears, but the more significant the topic is, the more (and sooner) this is likely to happen. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Use Vivaldi for auto-translate!

Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”

#199

Post by mannerheim »

irtigor wrote: post #197
mannerheim wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is asinine. It's not 'doing business' in 200 countries just because I haven't blocked my website everywhere outside of America. If somebody breaks German law, that's their problem, and this is the convention for matters outside of the Internet, too. US CBP, for instance, doesn't hold the seller responsible for complying with import laws and duties, that's the responsibility of the importer. That's because it wou…

Really? I don't think so, your example doesn't even seem particularly good, the importer is the one operating in two countries and that should know what he can legally buy in one and bring to the other, this is not a particularly new concept, in the same way I don't believe telegram itself would get in trouble if someone from another country entered Germany with the app installed in their phone.

Yes, this is really so. I can even confirm this is the case in Europe, as I once lived in the EU and paid import duties myself on something I imported from America.

In the case of Project Gutenberg and Telegram, the German side is the consumer, so it's entirely comparable. If the app or website is illegal in Germany, Germans who use it are the ones breaking the law here.

If I sell chocolates in America, and somebody in Germany where I have zero presence buys them, I should not expect to get arrested if I step foot on German soil because I used an ingredient banned in Germany. If I run a blog in America, and somebody in Germany comments 'Heil Hitler', I should not expect to get arrested if I have a layover flight in Berlin because I didn't delete that comment. To say otherwise is absolutely deranged. Germany can sieze my chocolates in customs - that's fine. They can block my blog - that's also fine. Your implications here are in utter contradiction to existing international law concerning the import and export of goods.

I challenge you to consider how it could be any other way - if the onus is on the other side, why stop at the website operator for not blocking Germans from their site? Is the host not also responsible? The ISP? Should FedEx be responsible for not inspecting their packages for illegal chocolates?

Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”

#200

Post by 2-718-281-828 »

stereoradonc wrote: post #198
dang wrote: post #109

We have deep respect for German and other languages, but HN is an English-language site, so posts here need to be in English. That may require waiting until a good English-language article appears, but the more significant the topic is, the more (and sooner) this is likely to happen. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Use Vivaldi for auto-translate!

Or rather Vivaldolf ... (just kidding, just kidding!)
Post reply on HN