In case that a WLAN is unencrypted, uninvited surfing the web cannot be avoided. The unobstructed access invites to use the open Wi-Fi. This surfing is legal and does not constitute a criminal offence, as long as it is confined to the mere surfing the Internet. However, it should be morally denunciated since whom secretly sneak, scrounges. However, in case of scrounging there is an important risk of unwanted guest such as viruses of malicious software.

According to the recently published police criminal statistics of the year 2010, the number of the recorded crimes regarding computer and Internet criminality has continued to grow strongly. 60.000 cases have been known last year, 20 percent more than a year before. The estimated high number of unknown and not registered crimes should not be underestimated. The increasing number of criminals feel safe from the law within the supposedly anonymous “legal vacuum” Internet.

Judgement of AG Marburg (Local Court Marburg) of 08/02/2010, file number: 91 C 981/09

The provider of a website where apparently free downloads are offered, however misleads the customer regarding the true costs and lures him into a chargeable subscription, makes himself liable to prosecution because of fraud, according to § 263 StGB (German Criminal Code). A lawyer who, on behalf of the provider, warns the non-paying customers and even tries to enforce the demands in court, makes himself also liable to prosecution because of accessory to fraud.

The public prosecutor’s office Hamburg has initiated preliminary investigations against Google, since the company has possibly violated the German Penal Law. The company photographed streets across Germany for its Internet service Street View, thereby data from unsecured WLAN connections and parts of e-mails have been “mistakenly” stored. Should private data have been unauthorised intercepted, an offence could be considered, according to § 202b StGB (German Penal Code).

Press release of OLG Hamburg (Higher Regional Court Hamburg) about the judgement of 15/02/2009

According to a revision judgement of the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg, deliberate and intended viewing of internet sites containing child pornography is punishable by law. The Higher Regional Court of Hamburg extended the concept of possession of the § 184b paragraph 4 StGB (Criminal Code) including also the downloading of files from the internet in the cache of the browser in that definition.

Press release No. 227/2009 of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) about the decision of 10/11/2009, file number: VI ZR 217/08

The Federal Supreme Court allows  the  Europeam Court  of Justice to clear the question of the international court competence about forbereance regarding naming by the suppliers who are settled in another member state.

Decision of the BVerfG (Federal Constitutional Court) of 24/09/2009, file numbers: 1 BvR 1231/04, 1 BvR 710/05, 1 BvR 1184/08

According to § 184 d StGB (Penal Code), suppliers of pornographic contents are responsible for ensuring through technical precautions that the pornographic content is not accessible for people under 18s. The age verification obligation is not inapplicable to protect minors against the negative influence of pornographic contents since these are freely available on the internet.  A law is already adequate to reach the aimed purpose when the reaching purpose is promoted.

Judgement of VG Göttingen (Administrative Court Goettingen) of 12/05/2009, file number: 5 A 4/07

If a professor stores and loads images and video files with child-pornographic content on his official PC, this shows such a serious disciplinary offence that it leads to the removal from the office. The access to such files by a professor leads, from the point of view of an impartial and considerate third, to a final and entire loss of the respect as a teacher and model.

Judgement of LG Hamburg (Regional Court Hamburg) of 21/11/2008, file number: 310 S 1/08

The invoicing enterprise, due to wrong solicitor information, must not pay the costs of any lawyer's fees for the counter warning letter of the erroneous opposing party, as long as it does not represent any takeover negligence. Particularly, the defendant enterprise may trust the solicitor advice. Because of an erroneous mistake of the IP address by the Internet provider, the plaintiff was accused to offer predominantly music files on the Internet without approval of the right holders.