 Here we go. Yes, welcome to the talk about wireless When we plan to this talk we hope that we could present you the stop of the Disturbers liability That the German law that makes operators of access points responsible for things that users do I want to tell you how what you can do to improve this situation And I hope that you're all engaged so that we can take some form of action in the last Times of the before the war. So what's the important point the? largest issue is up Which is that they? Ask you to stop it and have to pay some money, but it can also happen that you were asked About that even if you run a wireless for others or that So some may say You are you did not Surveil your own network sufficiently and others Normally there should be no liability for internet providers in Germany or rather Just for interest in a few exceptional cases one or other of you might remember the computer of case in the in 1980s That went quite large Because some someone wanted to make computer of liable for illegal pictures that were being swapped by the internet and Legislator then I think reacted rather responsibly and and created a privilege a liability privilege freeing providers from liability For what their users do this is now in a certain paragraph in the German broadcast media act paragraph 8 So those that offer certain services commercially such as providers So providers are not responsible for other super people's information that is That they transmit in a communication network or to those they provide access With the exception of the provider working together intentionally with the user to provide access So that should work shouldn't it even if you're a Wi-Fi or wireless LAN provider You'd normally don't pay apart from mobile hotspots perhaps but This otherwise this is exactly the same. You are just providing access and not actively Colluding with users, but then there was this judgment from the from from one of Germany's highest courts in 2010 Disturbers can be made liable Without being culprits or participants if they in any way Contribute to willingly and and adequately and causally Breaking a protected law which would normally be an international proper intellectual property law so This is about a case called a summer of our life as a moment of the sleeveless Which was probably a movie that the case was about. So how about paragraph 8 of the German broadcast media act? It did say that providers are not liable well the judges in 2010 quite surprised the whole legal expert community Because they based this on another paragraph of the German broadcast media act paragraph 10 Paragraph 10 is about hosting privilege. So these judges simply misunderstood the law they they checked and rejected an exception a liability exception that was about hosting And they did not apparently check the one mentioned before So you could then ask yourself why did it come to that? How did it come to that? What now host provider not access provider? Big surprise from those judges. So what can be done some Freifunk? Members went to the courts if at a time when they were going to be made liable as Disturbers and And they were relatively successful. So lower courts, for example the Charlottenburg, which is a district of Berlin the court there They accepted that Wi-Fi providers are providers in the sense of the law Some of them actually used tunneling to get out of this Tunneling their traffic to another country before they let it out and into the open Internet Which gets them around any legal problems? And the legal situation it kind of turns here and Towards and it provide a privilege for Freifunker members. So that is good news But these are lower courts at the lowest level in some cases the district level then the Munich court, which is a higher level used European right To to judge that Wi-Fi providers have to be providers in the sense of the law in the sense of this law. So we're still not in clear waters and the if Germany's highest courts cannot find a way to accept exempt providers from liability Grassroots providers Wi-Fi providers then the law has to be made clearer and this is what the Gitalic Z-Shift is doing one of the German NGOs they are Suggesting reforms of the law Let's call this a poor request For for the text of that paragraph they ask for two paragraphs to be added to to say that the exempt Exemption of responsibility also includes commercial and non-commercial providers of broad of wireless networks that Doon are not directed at a Districted and known group of users public wireless networks and This includes written warnings by lawyers So this is supposed to foster the spread of public wireless networks by Extending the privilege of non liability to those that offer access So paragraph 4 is a certain detail Because it may include Demands to to cease services so This This draft was was put Into Parliament by the Left Party of Parliamentary Group in the last Parliament Who are somewhat marginalized? It was also repeated by the Greens, but politics didn't take it up and The German government In particularly in particular the Economy economy minister Ziegman Gabriel head of the social Democrats. He said no way Free wireless Land is evil He more or less clearly said that When he introduced the digital to light agenda of the government in the spring. So this is something you can Strangely say why is it evil? It's normally something good, but While it's a bit liability said Sigma Gabriel is Neither technically nor legally a closed question We don't want to start a call for people to use certain places in the Internet anonymously and in certain public places To prepare crimes just because we made a law that says that no one is liable anymore. So That is the attitude That is also in the draft law that the German government introduced. It's not about fostering for public Wi-Fi It's it regards it as a haven for crimp for criminality So every private internet access point every open Wi-Fi can of course be used for illegal things Just like every road can be used to to drive to a crime scene To access a dead mailbox for exchanging info about an attack. So this argument seems quite absurd To treat the internet as something that should not, you know spread and should not be taken up So they introduced this draft law that actually is titled For string supporting Wi-Fi, but in fact the exact opposite is what's taking place now This is Ziggy Sigma Gabriel's dilemma Open Wi-Fi is evil, but citizens and the economy want free Wi-Fi. So what did they write into their law? Wi-Fi providers Cannot be made liable for an illegal act of a user If they have been if they have taken regular measures Expectable measures to to to prevent Illegal acts of their users. So everyone you don't have to be you don't have to be a lawyer That this this this term measures that can be expected that that can be Demanded what is this? So we have a lack of clarity in the law If it is going to be passed So even without a law we have uncertainty and with that new law we have uncertainty Many people just do not dare to fight one of these written warnings that German lawyers like to send that come attached with with a fee Because many colleagues In in the courts have of course seen that these warnings are being abused So there is quite a good chance of fighting them, but there is a certain risk of financial risk So many people say okay, I'll pay this perhaps Well, not really moderate, but but the fee that is lower than the costs could be if I go to the courts So the problem is not Being in the right the problem is the legal uncertainty and that prevents people from taking the risk To to to operate a Wi-Fi and probably be taken to the courts So this is not about the legal situation as such but the uncertainty And if you then look at this term measures that can be expected This term Reasonable measures will have to be interpreted by the courts until we before we know what they actually mean and Who would dare to to make their Wi-Fi publicly accessible if some Judge somewhere will then have to decide whether that person has then taken those reasonable expectable measures So you can actually ask whether that is enough to to provide any kind of legal certainty the reasoning of the government behind the law says that that they do but Actually, there is a certain amount of clarification further on in the draft law So What they say is that exemption from liability should not be there as such but there should be reasonable security measures against unauthorized access to the wireless local network and also Access to internet should not should only be provided to users that have declared Doing use that they are not going to be breaking the law So these two provisions will have to be secured will have to be taken if you want to be exempt from liability And and Let's have to take a look at the second condition first Provide access only to those users that have declared that during the use they will not break the law Now in practice that means that means you have to Install one of these start landing pages that that you get at first access. I always call this the lying page You don't start using your Wi-Fi differently if you fill out the form on that page You still have your Twitter client running and These pages simply suck and they are more or less ineffective bad guys just click okay No one will say whoo, there's this starting page. I'll better get out of that Wi-Fi But on the other hand it's as As As annoying and ineffective that those pages are it's not really tragic. They can be inserted into Freifunk firmware It so it could be part of the standard setup that Freifunk a major German group Promoting open Wi-Fi Provide, but then there is the second condition And And that is reasonable security measures against unauthorized access to the local network Now the reasoning for that says that the Wi-Fi provider should Protect his or her network in an appropriate way technically against access of unauthorized people so in particularly in particular Encrypting the router is a possible measure says the reasoning now what they mean for surely is encrypting the Wi-Fi traffic But it could also mean voluntary registration of users That's what the reasoning says, but that is actually not permissible by German or you can't ask for example for ID card data So the only thing that's left really is encrypting your Wi-Fi To protect it against use of unauthorized people But then that means but but then that opens the question what actually is unauthorized access if This is if we're talking about a public Wi-Fi for example a Freifunk Wi-Fi So everyone is supposed to be able to access It's not about particular kinds of views this is about unauthorized access at all So if you are running a Wi-Fi that should be open to everyone then this clause Particularly against all unauthorized access surely does not make clearly does not make any sense So what solutions are there for that? First solution could be if everyone's Authorized then you should clearly you can simply skip the securing measures They don't make any sense you would have to include one of those splash screens or landing pages But you wouldn't have to encrypt your Wi-Fi but with a certain amount of legal fantasy you could also Think of the second solution a network that everyone can access simply is not admissible because the law says that I have to be authorized and unauthorized users if the law talks about this Protecting against on an unauthorized access then there has to be this distinction and and that Would then of course be a catastrophe for Freifunk because They would have to distinguish between authorized and unauthorized, which is the exact opposite of a public free Wi-Fi accessible to anyone in other words This law if it would come into practice Depending on how it is interpreted could The way it is going to be interpreted is is very unclear. We have these reasonable measures We have some explanations what they could be But they do not really fit And a public Wi-Fi such as Freifunk. So This draft law is buggy The senseless landing page should be abolished and There is a high risk That's courts find a public Wi-Fi illegal and it should be amended Has been a lot of criticism from that's what I ticked off from the economy And this was there used to be a distinction between Wireless networks for financial reasons of frog or in private networks and They that was just stupid. So it was already taken out of the law So we have to look at how we can work with this new law suggestion So the first thing is no real problem, but it's stupid the other thing is that there's a significant risk that Cards may decide that free Wi-Fi may be against the law that the And it is not clear who is liable for the connection for the things the user do on a free Wi-Fi so What we want to do the free Wi-Fi networks would be destroyed by that so to look at the law Digi just has created a law idea it was included to the Parliament and it was changed, but it's not too late yet. So talk with your members of Parliament and I had made a Presentation for Town providers and they Have good connections to people from the local Members of Parliament. So if you are local if you're connected to the local internet service providers tell them that it's really a Catastrophe for local wireless or free wireless. If you say hey, we want to create a free wireless for the market place. So if we it gets likely All the government know Suggested that it could be on legal and unclear. So it still has to go through several discussion rounds and It will has to be submitted finally, but go to the people and talk about that and sell them what where the problem is so maybe Compromise would be that you just have this landing page and Although it's annoying, but it wouldn't hurt so No, if you don't want to take it how the German government Sees it at the moment then unfortunately will have to tunnel again So if we can't Fix the law, we will have to turn So go abroad or create a Clear provider so create Organizations that are clearly a provider and tunnel all your wireless traffic through them another problem it used to be that be tunneled abroad, but there were problems with the geotagging so they all got Yeah, one Freifunk division was actually Made into formally has only been accepted as an internet provider. So they are exempt That's the Freifunk in the Rhineland I think Okay, thanks a lot for me to are there any questions you can line up at the microphones in the aisles We have a lot of people standing there. I'll start on the left That we need to user groups so Accepted and accepted. So if we just open wireless that everybody who clicked on yes is Proper is an accepted user and those who know are not Well, that would be a way of interpreting the law that would perhaps number three in my list of solutions And it would be very nice if it would be interpreted and interpreted in that way But the problem is it is not clear what the courts will make of this and Of course, there is a large amount of lobbying interest from the industry that Engages in sending those written warnings with fees So a solution that is so so problematic. We will have to see whether That will be accepted or if someone from a lawyer's firm with a very renowned renowned name will convince the courts Otherwise, that's not something you want to rely on as a provider It's the legal uncertainty that which is the problem anything that's not crystal clear in the law Will lead to further written warnings by lawyers that has to be said Soon as the law can be interpreted in certain way We need one that cannot be interpreted in that evil way next question from the other microphone, please Thank you very much for the juristic talk, which I understood I Wanted to Devils advocates So what would I say if someone asked me free wireless is all evil Can be used to for misuse the most question with the letter bomb is Very well known What can you tell them as well? I think the easiest thing you can say is that the internet Can be abused can be misused anyway. There are so many ways of using it anonymously Structures exist Umts for example mobile data networks This is de facto anonymous because of nuts that is being used or hard very hard to identify users so the argument here goes Wi-Fi The many full ways of using the anonymous the internet anonymously is not really extended by Wi-Fi is in a significant way And that should be the central argument I can Trace back the IP address in public worlds. That's not possible. So fail Well, you have to give them and tell them sure you can trace an IP But only if you don't consider anonymity if as a user You can use tools the other microphone The loss has the access to the local network has to be Registered to No, that's not actually what the law says I can but in straight away the reasoning behind the law includes some very absurd things like Encryption obligation is useful to protect local users data. Yes, so clearly the the the Person writing up the draft had some wild ideas somewhere in the ministry that sound rather nice But that's not actually in the actual law draft Well, that would be nice hack wouldn't it but I think it's a very creative one. I like it But I do like it But of course that leaves us with the old problem of legal uncertainty and it's as long as this law is just a draft law It's worth fighting for more clarity Thank you morning My question is similar to the first could ask whether we could take the two Encryption and the first page. So if you say We have a shared sequence of password for everybody and it's only accepted together with So you put the wife a password from the public and you say hey use this only if it's you accept the rules It would perhaps From the point of view of the law, it would be acceptable to to put the password on your restaurant menus or something but But then that would be not a public Wi-Fi about a certain restaurants Wi-Fi and that's not what we're looking for Well, I come from the Netherlands And it's even worse there No Where I live Hi, there is free Wi-Fi and in Finland. It's also acceptable and possible and now that's my question your goal is of the goal of Gabriel is to to protect the property owner The lobby of them is there a thought about taking reducing the innovation significantly if there are no public wireless Germany is probably the in the island where there are really few open wireless networks There's a few wireless everywhere, but not in Germany Well, I don't really believe that this would lead to Significant increase in intellectual property violations and that's why I think this is a fake argument It's of course being used and as such as the interest in itself is justified But I believe that within the context of of the Wi-Fi discussion this is fake because Public Wi-Fi is normally are too slow for downloading large amounts of data not being really feasible for downloading movies and Streaming is not really traceable any way these days in most cases Whether that whether streaming is actually legal is another question so Any kind of legal proof is very hard and this is there's a certain lack of Legal regulation in this area anyway So that's why I think in the context of the Wi-Fi debate. It has to be said that this is not important Does Gabriel think about the loss of well, you would have to ask him of course Because my idea was to cause certain politicians unauthorized and get rid of the problems that way was this has been said Thanks again, and I think any further questions Yeah, give him that applause