Consumer protection
Facebook needs to fine due to small print numbers
Consumer advocates have won in court, a victory against Facebook. The social network has to pay 100,000 euros, because it changed a controversial clause in its terms and conditions.
The editorial recommends
The charm Offensive of Mark Zuckerberg
It is a gigantic PR Show of the Facebook founder in Germany. The guarantees in terms of smear campaigns and more. 200 employees in Berlin an eye on the Problem. Critical Questions? Prohibited. (26.02.2016)
Zuckerberg: “For hate speech have no place”
In the case of Facebook, much of what is in breach of German laws: beheading videos, hate speech, incitement of Violence. The network praised the improvement. But the group has any interest in it? (26.02.2016)
Zuckerberg: hate comments undesirable!
In Berlin, the first Facebook- “Town Hall Meeting was held today”. Mark Zuckerberg turned on the open stage the user questions. The were probably discussed – the debate continued, however, to be controversial in the network. (26.02.2016)
This is the consumer informed the Central Federal Association (vzbv). The reason for the by the district court in Berlin imposed a monetary penalty, therefore, is that Facebook have not changed despite strong condemnation of a controversial clause in its General terms and conditions (Az. 16 O 551/10).
“Companies need to implement decisions“
“Facebook is trying very persistently, to circumvent consumers’ rights in Germany and Europe. A fine of 100,000 euros is a strong Signal. Companies need to implement judicial decisions, and you can’t just sit this one out”, said the vzbv-Board Klaus Müller. Facebook did not comment on request.
In the disputed clause, the rights of use of the company in and to the content of its users. Facebook users grant the company a “worldwide license to use any IP content” that people post on Facebook, or in connection with the network – for example, images.
“Significant Disciplinary Action”
Although Facebook had changed the clause in the interim, but not sufficient, – stated in the explanatory Memorandum to the district court. The “significant disciplinary action” was justified, since the clause relates to a very large number of users and their rights “substantially” limiting. The decision of the court is not yet final.
The vzbv had already filed a 2010 lawsuit against intransparent terms and conditions of Facebook. Among other things, the free-of-charge transfer of users has been cloned data by Facebook to third parties. Another part of the comprehensive procedure in the Federal court of justice (BGH) pending. So this had to be decided only in January 2016 that social networks must not send users the Invitation messages. It was annoying advertising, ruled the Supreme court. Facebook wanted to check up the consequences for his “friends”function, it said.
sti/ml (afp, dpa, epd)