| |
| ▲ | riedel a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Judicial oversight took a while in Germany, but it is there now (but I guess you will always find an incompetent judge if you really want). I wonder if cloudflare would implement the German blocklist now that we have judicial oversight. Currently it is as nice registry for pirating sites for anyone using 1.1.1.1 [1] [1] https://cuiiliste.de/domains | |
| ▲ | ceejayoz a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That overstates things somewhat. https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/llglrd/2019... > To some extent, judges are subordinated to a cabinet minister, and in most instances this is a
minister of justice of either the federation or of one of the states. In Germany, the administration of
justice, including the personnel matters of judges, is viewed as a function of the executive branch of
government, even though it is carried out at the court level by the president of a court, and for the lower
courts, there is an intermediate level of supervision through the president of a higher court. Ultimately,
a cabinet minister is the top of this administrative structure. The supervision of judges includes
appointment, promotion and discipline. Despite this involvement of the executive branch in the
administration of justice, it appears that the independence of the German judiciary in making decisions
from the bench is guaranteed through constitutional principles, statutory remedies, and institutional
traditions that have been observed in the past fifty years. At times, however, the tensions inherent in this
organizational framework become noticeable and allegations of undue executive influence are made. | | |
| ▲ | nkmnz a day ago | parent [-] | | You're completely on the wrong track here. The discussion is not about who does or doesn't control the courts, it's about the question if someone who's rights have been violated can go to court or not with regard to that specific matter. If a court rules that blocking an IP address is illegal, the access provider has to stop blocking it. Period. |
| |
| ▲ | j-krieger a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | The CUII does not need a verdict to enact censorship. Make of that what you will. | | |
| ▲ | jacquesm a day ago | parent [-] | | The police doesn't need a verdict to issue you a fine either. But you can challenge your fine (and your block) in court. | | |
| ▲ | SkiFire13 18 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | A fine doesn't cause immediate harm as you don't have to immediately pay it while you challenge it in court, having your IP or website blocked happens immediately and will continue harming you until it's decreted that it wasn't lawful. | |
| ▲ | bonzini a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Challenging the IP bans in Italy is stupidly hard. Your VM gets an IP address that was used a few months ago for soccer piracy? Too bad, you won't be able to access it from Italy. | | | |
| ▲ | nkmnz a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 1. CCUI isn't even a government body 2. parent comment is wrong, CCUI is requiring court action by their members before they act. 3. I rather have companies competing under market pressure to find solutions to topics like copyright infringement than the German state (once again) creating massive surveillance laws and technical infrastructure for their enforcement in -house. | | |
| ▲ | j-krieger a day ago | parent [-] | | 2 is wrong. The CUII even blocks political activists because they dare to post their entire blocklist [1] [1]: https://lina.sh/blog/telefonica-sabotages-me | | |
| ▲ | waffleiron 19 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Read the post, they never blocked the activist. They just changed what they replied to a DNS query of an already blocked site to make it harder to detect. | |
| ▲ | nkmnz 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | 1. Article you've shared is from 2025-02-26
2. New rules have been in place from 2025-07
3. The author hasn't been blocked at all. You're either a liar or you cannot read. |
|
| |
| ▲ | j-krieger a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Are you really countering an argument against censorship by a power abusing entity with another group famous for power abuse? | | |
|
|
|
