<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>German IT Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://germanitlaw.com/?feed=rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://germanitlaw.com</link>
	<description>JBB&#039;s Blog on German and European Technology and Data Privacy Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2013 11:07:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-EN</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>German Data Protection Laws Do Not Apply to Facebook</title>
		<link>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=921</link>
		<comments>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=921#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2013 11:07:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Miriam Ballhausen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Protection Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court Decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://germanitlaw.com/?p=921</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On February 14th, 2013 the Administrative Court of Schleswig held in two decisions that German data protection laws do not apply to data processing by Facebook (file numbers 8 B 60/12 and 8 B 61/1).The interlocutory judicial procedure had been &#8230; <a href="http://germanitlaw.com/?p=921">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://germanitlaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=921</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal Supreme Court: Can a foreign company use a .de-domain?</title>
		<link>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=917</link>
		<comments>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=917#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2013 18:06:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Miriam Ballhausen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court Decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[German Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liability]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://germanitlaw.com/?p=917</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the case laid before the Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof; BGH) the court primarily had to decide about the liability of the administrative contact of the domain dlg.de. However, in the obiter dictum, the court also held under which circumstances &#8230; <a href="http://germanitlaw.com/?p=917">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://germanitlaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=917</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is double opt-in dead?</title>
		<link>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=902</link>
		<comments>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=902#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2012 20:25:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tim Engelhardt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[E-Commerce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfair Competition Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[double opt-in]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-mail advertising]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://germanitlaw.com/?p=902</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week, quite a few lawyers were more than surprised when they heard about a recent Higher Regional Court of Munich decision dealing with the question of how to get prior consent from recipients of advertising e-mails (decision of September &#8230; <a href="http://germanitlaw.com/?p=902">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://germanitlaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=902</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>7th National IT-Summit in Essen</title>
		<link>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=896</link>
		<comments>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=896#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2012 17:02:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Miriam Ballhausen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Protection Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[German Federal Ministry of Interior]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[German Federal Ministry of Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National IT-Summit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://germanitlaw.com/?p=896</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week, several German political leaders, members of the federal administration, academics, IT-businessmen and other members of the German society met in Essen for the 7th National IT-Summit. The summit is an invite-only conference being held once a year by &#8230; <a href="http://germanitlaw.com/?p=896">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://germanitlaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=896</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Leading Decision on Parents’ Liability for Copyright Violation by File Sharing Children</title>
		<link>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=893</link>
		<comments>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=893#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:58:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dominik Kirschner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Copyright Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright Infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court Decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Court of Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[File Sharing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://germanitlaw.com/?p=893</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The German Federal Court of Justice yesterday November 15, 2012 decided on how far parents can be held liable for their children’s illegal use of file sharing via peer-to-peer services and copyright violations resulting from that use. Not rarely, people &#8230; <a href="http://germanitlaw.com/?p=893">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://germanitlaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=893</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>On the Intricacies of German Unfair Competition Law</title>
		<link>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=881</link>
		<comments>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=881#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2012 20:02:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Julian Hoeppner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[E-Commerce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfair Competition Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court Decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terms and Conditions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfair Competition]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://germanitlaw.com/?p=881</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It‘s easy to be a unfair competition law violator in Germany. Just operate an eBay shop or deal on Amazon’s market place and use their default settings when informing your customers on how long it will take to get the &#8230; <a href="http://germanitlaw.com/?p=881">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://germanitlaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=881</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are WLAN-operators internet access providers?</title>
		<link>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=878</link>
		<comments>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=878#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2012 17:24:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Miriam Ballhausen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Copyright Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright Infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright Violation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[File Sharing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[German Federal Ministry of Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WLAN Liability]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://germanitlaw.com/?p=878</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[According to German jurisdiction, WLAN-operators can be held liable for online-infringements on third parties’ rights committed via their connection to the internet. That is, unless the operator duly fulfills his obligation to make sure such infringements cannot and will not &#8230; <a href="http://germanitlaw.com/?p=878">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://germanitlaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=878</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Monetary Penalties for Data Protection Breaches: ICO vs. German DP Authorities</title>
		<link>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=873</link>
		<comments>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=873#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2012 16:38:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Julian Hoeppner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Protection Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employee Data Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://germanitlaw.com/?p=873</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have just stumbled upon the Information Commissioner’s Office’s  page that informs the British public on the monetary penalties that the ICO has handed down over the last 1 ½ odd years: 26 penalties of about £ 120,000 on average. &#8230; <a href="http://germanitlaw.com/?p=873">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://germanitlaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=873</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>“Google Has Few Concerns About the Right to be Forgotten!”</title>
		<link>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=867</link>
		<comments>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=867#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:14:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Miriam Ballhausen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Protection Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU directive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oxford University]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to be forgotten]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://germanitlaw.com/?p=867</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Until last year, the right to be forgotten used to be an idea of Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, an Austrian law professor. He suggested – and probably still suggests – providing a “best before date” for data that is electronically saved. After &#8230; <a href="http://germanitlaw.com/?p=867">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://germanitlaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=867</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Forfeiting a Contractual Penalty by Continuously Storing a Photograph</title>
		<link>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=861</link>
		<comments>http://germanitlaw.com/?p=861#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2012 08:03:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Miriam Ballhausen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright Infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright Violation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court Decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://germanitlaw.com/?p=861</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On September 12th, 2012 the Higher Regional Court of Karlsruhe – 6 U 58/11 &#8211; decided on the question, which actions a debtor has to restrain from after he signed a declaration to cease and desist “using a photograph on &#8230; <a href="http://germanitlaw.com/?p=861">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://germanitlaw.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=861</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
