this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2026
385 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

85600 readers
3756 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website 4 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

So this was the regional court (Landgericht). The next one is the superior regional court (Oberlandesgericht) where Google will appeal now. Since I don't see any issues of the Bavarian constitution relevant to this case, the next one up is probably the federal court of justice (Bundesgerichtshof). And there is a small chance that either Google or the courts along the way decide to throw this to the EU court of justice.

Most decisions like this get suspended upon appeal, completely or partially, until people give up or there are no more courts to pester. But every appeal will be taken seriously and goes into review at the court whether there is merit to it. That takes time. And Google has the money for a frivolous tour through the courts. And then there is the danger of court ping-pong where the superior court sends this back with notes to the regional. Whose ruling may be appealed again, etc.

[–] unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I think the issue you described is present in most all legal systems.

Also, certain aspects are a necessary evil (right to appeal is sacred, as is serious consideration). Money and pingpinging however are valid complaints.

Also, I'd rather have my justice slow (when there's no immidiate harm) and done by humans than by AI. If nothing else, humans can be held accountable. Alternatives cannot. And luckily, the enlightened were on the right track with the model legal system they built.

[–] FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

You're reading more criticism into that than I really feel. I just answered a question. And my original point was merely that while the article makes it almost sound like this ruling was final, it isn't. The war will be entering its second battle soon.

[–] unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 50 minutes ago)

Sorry if you felt it as criticism, I just meant to say "yup, I already know".

I also wanted to point out that it's a necessary evil and that I'm personally fine with it (so yeah, I guess it's a counterargument of sorts, but I also feel we're agreeing on pretty much all of it as well)

Edit: Thank you for answering my question about the German court hierarchy in the first place, I forgot my manners there for a bit!