[Xylakant]

This is an extremely short (and misleading) summary of the courts argument. Among the reasons for assuming jurisdiction is the assumption that project Gutenberg targets users in Germany and part of that assumption is Project Gutenberg’s statement that the goal is to make the works available globally (thus including germany) (quote: “anyone anywhere”). The fact that content and at least parts of the page is available in Germany adds to that assumption. It’s been established that websites targeting german people (also) fall under german jurisdiction.

So no, not an extraordinary or new theory of international law.

[dsr_]

It is, however, a terrible theory, since the immediate effect is that every website is subject to every jurisdiction in the world.

[philippnagel]

While possibly terrible, the logic is not deniable.

[Xylakant]

No, that’s not the effect. If you make a website in the US hosted on US servers that does not obviously target german customers then you don’t fall under german jurisdiction. It’s not sufficient that your site is generally accessible from germany.

However, if you do add things as “we ship to germany” to a shop then you fall under german jurisdiction - which is fine in my books, because the customer should have a simpler legal recourse than the company.

Having to conform to foreign laws is just the flip side of being able to reach those people easily.

[mcguire]

Or, if you add German translations? What if you add a link to Google translate, allowing German translations?

[Xylakant]

If you that in the intention of targeting german citizens (or all people of the world), yes, that could lead to a court assuming jurisdiction.