-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
"John" Lull <lull@acm.org> writes:
John> On Sun, 28 Jan 1996 21:41 +0100 (MET), Olmur wrote:
It's illegal in Germany to publish material denying the holocaust. In the same moment this guy sent his book (?) per snail-mail from Canada to Germany he commited a crime here in Germany.
John> How pray tell is a person in Canada supposed to know that? I John> (in the US) certainly had no idea Germany had such a law. Not knowing a law doesn't mean that I'm not liable for breaking it. John> Are you saying that, if I ran a bookstore, and accepted John> international mail orders, I would have to screen every order to John> ensure I did not ship something offensive to the German John> government? Denying the holocaust is not 'something offensive to the German government' but something that hurts the feeling of the people whose relatives were murdered by the Nazis. Free speech ends where other people can reasonable claim that their feelings are badly hurt. John> And if I did fill such an order, and without ever having set John> foot in Germany, I could be arrested on my next trip to Europe, John> extradited to Germany, and imprisoned for doing something that John> is constitutionally protected in the US? Is it constitutionally protected in US to knowingly hurt other people's feelings and to trample on graves????? John> Alternatively, what if I were to post to usenet a message John> denying the Holocaust, and one person in Germany retrieved that John> message. Would I then be subject to arrest and extradition to John> Germany? Interesting question. I assume from a formal standpointyou were, but practically it might not be possible to proof that you sent the message. John> Mike Duvos wrote in another message:
It is interesting to note that there is no specific law prohibiting free speech for Holocaust Agnostics in Germany. The actual laws under which such cases are prosecuted are libel laws, which have been liberally interpreted to mean that one may not "libel" deceased Jews as a class or their memory in the minds of their surviving relatives.
John> If in fact this is merely a judicial interpretation of an John> apparently unrelated law, it just plain ridiculous to expect John> people in other countries to be aware of it. Mike's information is old. Meanwhile it's explicitely forbidden to deny the holocaust. John> If this is really what Germany wants, then it sounds like time John> to totally cut Germany off from the internet, simply in self John> preservation. No one can reasonably be expected to research John> even the clearly-written laws worldwide that might conceivably John> apply in such cases, much less far-fetched judicial John> interpretations of such laws. As said above: the law is explicite. When I trade with another country of course I have to obey this country's laws. I mean if I visit US I have to obey US-law. If I know it or not. If you visit Germany, you have to obey German law. If you know it or not. The same is with trade. John> Olmur continued:
I don't think it's astonishing that Denmark imprissoned this guy and transported him to Germany. It's a normal thing that one country imprisons a criminal another country is searching and the delivers him/her to the country in question.
John> I, on the other hand, find this QUITE astonishing. His actions John> were legal in both Canada and Denmark (probably everywhere in John> the world except Germany), and he did nothing in Germany. He imported illegal stuff into Germany. If I import weapons to US without a licence I might be imprisoned on my next visit there, too. Due to our history publishing NAZI-propaganda is forbidden in Germany. The big majority in Germany agrees with this view, that NAZI-propaganda doesn't fall under 'free speech'. Some neo-NAZIs publish their books in other countries and then illegally transfer them to Germany. BTW, many European countries forbid publishing NAZI-propaganda. And as far as I know Denmark plans to change their law, too. John> Of course, I find the US actions in kidnapping people in other John> countries quite indefensible also, but at least in those cases John> the persons involved clearly knew they were violating at least John> US law, and in most cases were violating their local laws as John> well. How do you know that they know? How do you know that the guy in question didn't know? Olmur - -- "If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy" --- P. Zimmermann Please encipher your mail! Contact me, if you need assistance. finger -l mdeindl@eisbaer.bb.bawue.de for PGP-key Key-fingerprint: 51 EC A5 D2 13 93 8F 91 CB F7 6C C4 F8 B5 B6 7C -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2i Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAwUBMQxwqA9NARnYm1I1AQGEaQQAodckRyq428q6UyPwBRAc7cmhMzCtJdio iFk7/MZG25C4IPVk//hNTpp5vCFggKkLSsl1yqKgz51pBeXvR2OqjDLqXstygfJE tDNKSEgCbeSNATM5Tgb08ZorZLXU/NBwJjmNWDjBGjgemwJy7Y1ncRpD1XfxxrDp ZI7B1WEaqTA= =4Zta -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----