Facebook collects gossip in front of the Frankfurt Regional Court
Facebook collects gossip in front of the Frankfurt Regional Court
–
Facebook blocked a Ruhrbarone reader for sharing an article by the Ruhrbarone on the anti-Semitic attack in Halle. In front of the regional court in Frankfurt am Main, Facebook was now on the cover.
In October 2019, shortly after the anti-Semitic attack by a right-wing extremist on the synagogue in Halle, Ruhrbarone reader Alex Steiman shared the article Halle: The way from the anti-Semitic agitation of the Dortmund Nazis to Balliet is not far from Stefan Laurin and put a quote in his post proceeding from the article. He was then suspended from Facebook for 7 days, but was not told why. We reported back then.
Steiman turned to the lawyer Joachim Steinhöfel, who came up with his donation-financed initiative Freedom of expression on the net accepted the case and filed a lawsuit after an expired warning period.
Then it got strange in court. The answer to the question of what, for God’s sake, could violate Community standards, evidently aroused incomprehension and amazement at the hearing in the press chamber at the Frankfurt court. Because, according to Facebook in court, the sentence “The neo-Nazi Stephan Balliet may have been a lone perpetrator, but he was not alone.” the article could also be read as support for the attack.
The court did not find this very convincing and forbade Facebook to delete the article from our reader Alex Steiman’s profile and to block it and also grumbled Facebook to assume the majority of the legal costs. “The deletion of the plaintiff’s contribution was illegal.” and “There is no evidence in the post that the post could have been interpreted as supporting a cruel terrorist attack. Because Swiss Post makes it very clear that the opposite position is being taken here. […] Because even with a cursory glance, the post is not understood to mean that it sympathizes with the hate crime committed by the assassin Balliet. “, the court unequivocally states in its reasoning for the judgment.
Until the beginning of July, Facebook could still appeal. Attorney Steinhöfel is calm: “I would, however, consider carefully whether I would submit such a situation to the Higher Regional Court and would further damage my reputation with such an argument.” Steinhöfel is confident. For him, such procedures are not Pyrrhic victories: “Embarrassing deletions, fines for violating judicial prohibitions, blockages because Heinrich Heine is classified as a hate speaker. All of this is an ongoing PR disaster for the company and damages its image. “
Let’s hope that for our reader Alex Steiman the trouble is over.
–
