Project Gutenberg blocks access from Germany

Post by jhasse » Mon, Mar 05, 2018, 12:54 PM UTC

klibertp wrote: post #519

jhasse wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They cannot ban a citizen of another country from hosting said porn if it's legal there. That's not what's happening though, gutenberg.org was only ordered to make the 18 books not accessible from German IPs. No one talked about a hosting ban.

The rule is: you can't, in any way, compel citizens of other countries living outside your country to do anything . You really shouldn't even try, unless it's with the cooperation with the other country (just fill a lawsuit there!). If you do try, it's a straight path to extraordinary renditions, drone strikes, assassinations and other such joyous things. I'm not saying that it has to lead to this, but it could, it d…

Post by oemerax » Mon, Mar 05, 2018, 2:20 PM UTC

CO-VAX wrote: post #41

I just donated $100 to PGLAF because they are fighting the good fight. Their donation page [0] includes "Think of this as a contribution to your grandchildren." However in this instance I think of it as a contribution against publishers (ab)using the justice system much like so-called patent trolls. > Q: The plaintiff is S. Fischer Verlag, GmbH. Is that the international conglomerate? > A: Yes, it is part of a family…

Post by Xylakant » Mon, Mar 05, 2018, 3:17 PM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #481

Xylakant wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But consider the implications. Firms hosting content from a particular country would be subject to court orders from every country. That would not end well. They already are if they target users in a given country. Lack of international enforcement just means that they might escape enforcement. See also GDPR, the US case against Mega, a company run by a NZ resident and incorporated in Hongkong IIRC. See also how Tw…

Sure, many companies comply "in certain countries lest they’re blocked completely". But Alexandra Elbakyan has ignored judgments in US courts against her. Under Russian law, I believe that her site is legal under fair use. She has managed to piss off the Putin administration, but that's a separate issue (as I understand it, her communist purity vs his vanity). And Google basically left China over censorship demands.…

Post by lovich » Mon, Mar 05, 2018, 6:53 PM UTC

freeflight wrote: post #98

lovich wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then Germany as an entity can deal with the results of their society being structured in a way that allows those special interests to have that level of control. America has the same problems as well but it's be unreasonable to expect people in other sovereignties to make special accommodations for me just because my government is making me follow a different set of rules

> it's be unreasonable to expect people in other sovereignties to make special accommodations for me Nobody is expecting PG to do anything like that, what is expected is that PG just removes these 18 books from German access, if they don't then the German publisher can cease&desist them over giving access to said books, which would have no effect at all on GP due to it being an entity that's registered in California,…

Post by smsm42 » Tue, Mar 06, 2018, 5:02 AM UTC

Mindwipe wrote: post #399

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what about publishing in English? Does the UK take precedence and the US has no standing? Or is a publisher subject to courts in both countries?

UK courts have always held that US based publications/websites commit libel in the UK if they have a readership in the UK, irrespective or the location of the publisher. The US doesn't enforce those judgements any more, but the UK still holds the principle.