The online publication “The European”, which belongs to the Weimer Media Group, is accused of having in the past handled texts from politicians, among others, in a way that violated copyright law. The texts and authors were presented in such a way that it looked as if the contributions had been created specifically for “The European”. The right-wing blog author Alexander Wallasch makes this accusation and thus fans it out AfD Morning air too. The party is happy to accept the proposal and is taking action against the Minister of State for Culture, Wolfram Weimer, whose former publishing house “The European” appears. Weimer recently took the AfD on the offensive and predicted that it would reach nine percent in 2029. Now the right-wing party is hitting back and is suggesting that he resign because of the alleged affair. “The European” rejects the accusation that copyright has been violated.
Speeches and statements by politicians
These are texts that appeared in “The European” up to 2021. Speeches and statements from many politicians have been documented because they see themselves as a debate platform that offers a wide variety of points of view, the online medium says. You don’t have anything against that copyright violated. “The European” certainly did, says the author Wallasch; it looked as if the contributions were created for the portal and their authors worked as authors for “The European”.
The AfD party leader then resigned Alice Weidelunder whose name around a hundred texts “appeared” in “The European”, immediately announced legal action in an interview with t-online. The cultural policy spokesman for the AfD parliamentary group, Götz Frömming, went one better and said that Minister of State for Culture Wolfram Weimer had a “serious problem”. If the allegations are confirmed, Weimer would have to resign.
AfD: “100 stolen items from Alice Weidel”
Alice Weidel “never worked as an author for ‘The European’,” writes the AfD, and she was not asked “whether her texts could be used there.” Wolfram Weimer did exactly what he accused the US digital companies of – “he copied articles without permission in order to then market them profitably on his platform”. Weimer filled “The European” with “100 stolen articles from Alice Weidel.” If you look at “especially Weimer’s desire to ‘destroy’ the AfD, while he uses the political content of the AfD federal spokeswoman Alice Weidel as publication material on his portal, then quite a few questions arise. But the most important one is this: Is such a federal minister still acceptable? In a normal world, the answer would be obvious. In times of a Merz government, it can instead be assumed that the Chancellor will Will hold a protective hand over Duplicate Minister Weimer.”
For the AfD, Wolfram Weimer is already history, or they would like him to be. And the author Alexander Wallasch, who broke the story last week, was already convinced that Weimer would only stay in office for a few more hours. The quick-to-judge so-called “plagiarism hunter” Stefan Weber, who is also affected by the allegedly inadmissible copying of texts, said on That’s where the right people come together.
“The European”: “clearly reject the allegation”
But what about the practice under attack? In response to our inquiry, “The European” tells us that the “insinuation” that texts by Alice Weidel were stolen is “clearly rejected”. “The European” is a “curated debate magazine”. In addition to journalistic texts and original contributions, the portal offered numerous “documentary texts”, “especially in the years before the pandemic”. Speeches or press releases from top politicians from the parties represented in the Bundestag were documented with sources. If “individual contributions” by Alice Weidel and others “were not published with proper references,” these are “craftsmanship errors that we regret.” Only the editorial team decided on the documentation. “The politicians,” “The European” further informs us, “in principle have no right to decide whether public speeches and statements on current issues are published or not. For good reason, the free press does not have to ask for permission or pay a fee. So far, all parties represented in the Bundestag have found it very good that their original statements and opinions are disseminated.” There has been no criticism of these “textures” since 2015. Instead, politicians were happy that their points of view were being disseminated. Most of the documentation texts were deleted when the “European” was relaunched in 2021.
The fact that the authors of the texts distributed by the “European” were listed as “authors” had “nothing to do with appropriation; it was not intended to give the impression that these politicians were employees of the portal.” However, one thinks about the author portraits, perhaps there are “better options”. The “authors” of the “European” identified according to this standard included not only Alice Weidel, but also today’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Annalena Baerbock, Robert Habeck, Sahra Wagenknecht and others Alexander Dobrindt. Florian Gallwitz, professor of computer science at the Nuremberg University of Technology, quickly revealed that there were 991 “author profiles” in the “European”, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as well as Alliance 90/The Greens.
“Worked amicably with authors”
Publishing texts in full without asking and using them for your own publication, i.e. not just referring to them or linking to them on the Internet or quoting them, is not common practice in quality journalism and could constitute a violation of copyright. Some paragraphs of the Copyright Act come into question: paragraph 2 (protectability of works), paragraphs 16 and 19 (right of publication) up to paragraph 97 (damages). When publishing texts that have already been published, one can refer to paragraphs 44 of the Copyright Act, which define the right to quote and the right to reproduce public speeches.
When asked, “The European” tells us that it cannot be ruled out that “there were also errors in the documentation texts” when citing sources. If that was the case, “we regret it and will clarify this with the authors concerned.” We have “worked very amicably with authors over a decade and a half. We are currently re-examining the old inventory from 2015 to 2020 – as available – but this is technically difficult.”
The fact that the author Wallasch and the AfD are targeting Minister of State for Culture Weimer with their allegations is obvious for political reasons, but does not fully capture the possible responsibility. Since this summer, the publisher and editor-in-chief of “The European” has been the journalist Ansgar Graw, who worked for the broadcaster Freies Berlin in the 1990s and from 1998 in various positions for “Welt” and “Welt am Sonntag”. Before him, Alexander Görlach, Oswald Metzger and Stefan Groß-Lobkowicz led the way. Görlach was founding publisher and editor-in-chief from 2009. In 2015, the online publication joined the Weimer Media Group, whose business has been run solely by his wife Christiane Goetz-Weimer since Weimer’s move into politics.
The “European” suspects that the AfD’s excitement is based more on political than factual motives. This seems “like a campaign by right-wing circles based on Wolfram Weimer’s criticism of American tech companies at the book fair.”
At his book fair appearance, Weimer accused the platform companies from China and the USA of training their AI “with billions of works without obtaining the consent of the authors, let alone paying them a cent.” Cultures are “degraded to supposed suppliers of raw materials and shamelessly exploited”. This is nothing but “digital colonialism”. The corporations practiced “mental vampirism.” Trump intimate and former US ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell, as he wrote on Shortly afterwards, Grenell expressed his satisfaction that Weimer’s “hypocrisy” had been exposed. With the AfD and Trump’s MAGA complex (and Putin in the background), what belongs together is apparently growing together.
What are the potential legal consequences Friedrich Merz and the CDU could face if found guilty of copyright infringement under German law?
AfD Targets Weimer Over Alleged Copyright Violations: Legal and Political Implications explored
The Core of the Dispute: Allegations and Evidence
The Option for Germany (afd) party has recently leveled accusations of copyright infringement against Friedrich Merz, leader of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU). The claims center around the alleged unauthorized use of copyrighted images and text in Merz’s public presentations and online materials. Specifically, the AfD alleges that merz’s team utilized stock photos and excerpts from articles without securing the necessary licenses or providing proper attribution.This has sparked a notable debate surrounding intellectual property rights, copyright law Germany, and the ethical obligations of political figures.
The AfD has presented what they claim is evidence – screenshots and links too original sources – demonstrating the similarities between the content used by Merz and the copyrighted material. They are demanding a public apology and a commitment to adhere to copyright regulations in the future. The scale of the alleged violations is currently under scrutiny, with the AfD suggesting a pattern of disregard for copyright protection.
Legal Ramifications: Potential Consequences for merz and the CDU
The legal implications for Merz and the CDU could be significant. German copyright legislation is stringent, and even unintentional infringement can result in penalties. Potential consequences include:
* financial Penalties: Copyright holders can seek monetary damages to compensate for the unauthorized use of their work. The amount will depend on the extent of the infringement and the commercial value of the copyrighted material.
* Injunctions: A court could issue an injunction preventing Merz and the CDU from further using the infringing material.
* Reputational Damage: Even if the legal penalties are minimal, the accusations themselves can significantly damage Merz’s and the CDU’s public image, particularly concerning issues of integrity and respect for the law.
* Criminal Charges (in severe cases): While less likely in this scenario, purposeful and large-scale copyright infringement can, in some instances, lead to criminal prosecution.
the case hinges on proving intent and the extent of the unauthorized use.Merz’s defense will likely focus on arguments such as fair use (though limited in German law), de minimis use, or a claim that the use was properly licensed but documentation is missing. Expert legal counsel specializing in German copyright law will be crucial for both sides.
Political Fallout: Strategic Timing and motives
The timing of the AfD’s accusations is noteworthy. Coming during a period of heightened political tension and ahead of upcoming elections, the move is widely seen as a politically motivated attack.The afd aims to:
* Damage Merz’s Credibility: By portraying Merz as someone who disregards the law, the AfD hopes to undermine his authority and appeal to voters.
* Distract from AfD Controversies: The afd itself has faced numerous controversies, including accusations of extremism and internal disputes. This attack on Merz could serve as a distraction from these issues.
* Appeal to a Broader Audience: framing the issue as one of ethical conduct and respect for intellectual property could appeal to voters who are not typically aligned with the AfD.
This tactic aligns with the AfD’s broader strategy of utilizing political attacks and exploiting perceived weaknesses in opposing parties. The effectiveness of this strategy remains to be seen, but it has undoubtedly injected a new level of intensity into the political discourse.
The Role of Stock Photography and Licensing
This case highlights the complexities surrounding the use of stock photography and the importance of proper licensing. Many individuals and organizations rely on stock images for their communications,but it’s crucial to understand the terms of the license agreement. Key considerations include:
* License Type: Different licenses grant different rights. Some licenses allow for commercial use, while others are restricted to personal use.
* Attribution Requirements: Some licenses require attribution to the copyright holder, even when the image is used legally.
* Usage Restrictions: Licenses may specify limitations on how the image can be used, such as prohibiting modifications or use in certain contexts.
* Extended Licenses: For broader or more complex usage scenarios,an extended license may be necessary.
Failure to comply with the terms of a stock photo license can lead to legal repercussions, even if the infringement is unintentional. Stock image licensing is a critical aspect of content creation in the digital age.
Similar Cases and Precedents in German Politics
while a direct parallel to this situation is rare, there have been instances of politicians facing scrutiny over copyright issues. In 2018, a minor scandal erupted when a Green Party politician was found to have used a photograph without permission on their campaign website. Although the case was resolved with a public apology and payment of a licensing fee, it underscored the importance of due diligence.
Furthermore, the broader debate around fair use in Germany is ongoing. Unlike the United States, German copyright law offers limited exceptions for fair use, making it more challenging for individuals and organizations to rely on this defense. This case could potentially contribute to a re-evaluation of these provisions.
Practical Tips for Avoiding Copyright infringement
For political campaigns,businesses,and individuals,here are some practical steps to avoid copyright infringement:
- Obtain Proper Licenses: Always secure the necessary licenses before using copyrighted material
