Shouldn't Lawyers Sending Out Nastygrams Online Understand The Internet First?
from the it-would-probably-help dept
It’s amazing sometimes to see what happens when lawyers who don’t seem to understand the internet start freaking out about something online. You would think, by now, people would know to go and ask someone who knows a little better to explain what’s going on — but we still see bizarre cases that never would have gone anywhere if someone had simply spent a tiny bit of time asking how the internet works, and whether or not there’s a real issue.. John points us to a situation in Germany, where a blogger received a legal nastygram from the Sozialgericht Bremen, “a court of law for dealing with cases in the area of German social services” because his blog shows up in a Google search for Sozialgericht Bremen. Obviously, it seems silly to think that it would be illegal to mention Sozialgericht Bremen online, and after that, it’s hard to see how the blogger in question has any control over where his site appears on a Google search for that term. However, that won’t stop some lawyers from assuming that someone must be to blame — and when someone’s to blame, out come the legal nastygrams, even if they have no basis in, say, law.
Comments on “Shouldn't Lawyers Sending Out Nastygrams Online Understand The Internet First?”
Wouldn't it be funny if
Lawyers shut down Techdirt with frivolous claims, wearing down all its financial resources? Mike’s strategy of being anti-establishment invites this fate.
Re: Wouldn't it be funny if
What an irrelevant comment. I hate your comment, and I love Tech Dirt.
People + Lack of Knowledge + Pride = i.e. Sozialgericht Bremen
No Subject Given
Can we get a Google top 10 here…
Sozialgericht Bremen
Re: Top 15 of 2005 Year-End Google Zeitgeist
Top 15 of 2005 Year-End Google Zeitgeist
From http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html
1. richard pryor
2. tookie
3. john lennon
4. jennifer aniston
5. debra lafave
6. ann coulter
7. chronicles of narnia
8. lillo brancato jr.
9. brokeback mountain
10. making the band 3
11. survivor
12. hermione
13. syriana
14. luciana bozan
15. pearl harbor
No Subject Given
I am not sure if there were lawyers involved yet. It was the director of the Sozialgericht who personally felt offended and send out that letter, only threatening legal consequences. No idea whether she is a lawyer.
Very ridiculous still…
Re: No Subject Given
Not only was it just the director of the Sozialgericht, it’s all about a “Zuordnungsverwirrung” — that is, she (the director) is claiming that a casual Internet user could be fooled into thinking the blogger’s website was actually the website of the Sozialgericht, because the *title* of the page which is appearing in the Google result is simply “Sozialgericht Bremen” (and not, for example, “Blog post about Sozialgericht Bremen”). She mentions that it’s misleading because in the Google summary, you see the page title before you visit the page.
Yes, she’s threatening with laws & such, but you need to know the Germans to know that this is kind of a nonaggressive and almost socially acceptable message, and it shouldn’t be understood in American hyperlitigious terms… if you ask me.
No Subject Given
Should #7 be
Chronic-what-cles of Narnia?
Re: No Subject Given
Like comedy…
Those Damn German Lawyers!
Why don’t they just sue Google for $billions like Americans would? It’s positively undemocratic!
But they’ll be really unhappy about what this has done for their Google results (count the blog entries).
No Subject Given
What makes this so much more amusing is the sheer mass of people linking to his blog in response to the letter, and the sharp rise in the number of times “Sozialgericht Bremen” is mentioned on his blog because he allows comments. His site will be number 1 in no time.
Ahhh… when the arrogant and ignorant collide 😉