Last night had invited the FDP Heidelberg to an event with the Federal Minister of Justice Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger. Topic:
"civil rights and privacy - the Internet and law and freedom."
I had come to the event because I received an e-mail the party. As for me a little annoyed: I had previously had no contact with the FDP, I could not even understand where the my e-mail address had. So I asked again for writing. And got the following response:
"Thank you for your Fax. The data are freely accessible and we just wanted to point out the event with our Federal Justice Minister. Your data is deleted and will not be. " [verbatim reproduction of the e-mail, AnmdRed]Especially with an event that was about privacy, Internet law was me too wrong and too little. . I wanted to ask again, personally
In the thoroughly entertaining presentation to the Minister following a proclamation of data protection as a fundamental right, the topic "new ways of advertising" was raised this beat Mrs. Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger that addresses are valuable -. valuable thought as much. What are the addresses would be used should the subject to control by the proprietor - "self-determination" was the slogan. Aha, I thought to myself, my question would take so well to listen. I certainly had not intended that the FDP would send me advertising.
interesting I found the information that - should also provide a foundation data - based on the Stiftung Warentest. Company would examine whether they observed data protection requirements, and could then advertise with a privacy seal for it.
then followed the inevitable discussion of child pornography on the Internet (with the correct note, that only deletion not locking help here), where I found it interesting that would take care of the Federal only "7 officials" for deletion requests. Too little, as the minister was.
Almost enjoyable I found that the slogan was the "Internet as a legal vacuum" only complete 3 times.
In the discussion I could ask the minister then my question - and I had them on their achievements towards self-determination and then asked whether the FDP Heidelberg would get probably attributed to the privacy seals - in the face of dealing with unauthorized advertising, I saw this rather critical.
The answer then disappointed me a bit: If my e-mail address publicly available on my homepage to be, be a breach of data protection law is not clear, said Ms. Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger. There is a short lecture was followed by list privileges and recent legislative amendments in BDSG (Federal Data Protection Act).
In fact, the response so half-right. Because there may indeed be no data protection are violated regulations.
but
pointed out that, in response to the statement of the Minister of Justice, also another visitor to the event out. Unsuccessful:
Yes, of course, there are European rules by which you can not just addresses from web pages should copy. They were here but probably not injured, said Ms. Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger concluded.
Hm, are European to the arrangements. It is German law. I find it sad that that was not (a) seen.
I took pity, moreover, that the second part of my question was not answered. I had, even asked how the FDP would make it easier for small and medium-sized companies to conform with data protection act. Because I believe that the regulations were in BDSG anything but clear and legible and therefore for small businesses without their own legal department is difficult to implement. But
showed the Minister for another issue with the index finger on Facebook and the likes: it should not accept that such Internet companies about their privacy provisions to 8 or 10 pages stretched and thus unreadable would. These companies should be required to develop the data protection rules simple.
I would also like to see the BDSG. Short, simple and readable. But I fear this will probably remain a wish.
* The text has been changed due to the below comment - the commentator is right: an anti-competitive act is not given, but the interference with the business establishment. For this I would also like to Judgement the Higher Regional Court of Munich of 12.02.2004, application No: point 8 U 4223/03, which had to judge in a similar case (E-mail a party to a lawyer), including making message at heise.de of the context of .
