We're quite diverging from the topic ... Am 23.10.22 um 01:30 schrieb Sebastian Nielsen via mailop:
a htaccess wont discharge you from being a "public service".
Yes, no, maybe. German courts seem to be ok with an .htaccess to keep the general public out for you to not need an imprint page (even outside of the .htaccessed-off namespace, that is).
As long as you respond from packets from the public, you are a public service, even if you have .htaccess password protection.
Says who, in which legal context in which jurisdiction?
For example, Swedish cookie law […]
So a Swedish webmaster (d/f/m) has to put up an imprint on their website as well and show a cookie banner before it can be seen? (FTR: This, again, is a rhetorical question.)
Note here that cookie law applies to ALL public websites and services that use cookies - even if you are offering them without remundiation.
But we're currently on the topic of "Tangent: Banks and imprint requirements in Germany", and while the inconsistent regulation across the EU member states certainly is fascinating, I fail to see the relevance of cookie laws to worldwide mail operation?
Do you have the §18 in full?
https://www.gesetze-bayern.de/Content/Document/MStV https://www.landesrecht-hamburg.de/bsha/document/jlr-MedienStVtrHArahmen Somehow it isn't covered by https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de (run by the Federal Ministry of Justice and the Federal Office of Justice), maybe because it's just a »Staatsvertrag« between all 16 Federal States (media law is, IIRC like some other areas, state law; some events between 1933 and 1945 suggested that, going forward, the central government should better be left out of control). Ciao, -kai
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
