Hacker News Reader

Comment by gyulai | Hacker News Reader

I don't know. We don't have any such thing as small claims court in Germany, but my expectation would be that judges in low-level courts will try their very best not to get noticed for setting any kind of precedent whatsoever. The only thing that's going to happen if you rule against Apple in a low-level court is that they will go into revision, and carrying a high probability that the higher-level judge will overturn the decision and make the lower-level judge look bad in the process.

Also, any kind of effort to annoy someone by bringing coordinated actions in lots of venues all at the same time is probably abuse of process.

View on HN

The idea isn't just to use small claims courts, but to use whatever first level legal venue to seek redress you can find in your area. That might mean small claims courts, or consumer protection bureaus, or binding arbitration. Whatever it is the idea is to coordinate with others to do so in a way that strains the resources of the organization you're fighting against and is in venues that are sympathetic to consumers and are able to make clear judgements with little chance for the opposing side to appeal.

The goal of this isn't to annoy someone, the goal is to seek compensation for their unacceptable behavior and raise awareness of it so that others may do so as well.

With the mindboggling assymetry in resources between a single individual and an entity like Apple or Google it only makes sense for people to team up and coordinate against them.

>but my expectation would be that judges in low-level courts will try their very best not to get noticed for setting any kind of precedent whatsoever.

Is there even such a thing as precedent in the German legal system?

There isn't.

Case law isn't directly normative in civil law traditions like Germany and France in the same way it is in common law traditions like the U.S. and U.K. But court decisions that are deemed interesting do get picked up in journals, cited in academic literature, and cited by other judges in their own decisions. There is a herd dynamics psychology where judges and academic writers default to following along with the principles established in each other's decisions and academic writing, rather than go against that consensus. (Unless their conviction is very strong, and they are, depending on the gravity of the issue, willing to stake their reputations and careers on those convictions). -- I brushed over that distinction when I used the term “precedent”. In my mind it's pot-ay-toh po-tah-toh.

I think a fair coordination would be for someone somewhere to complain about this every single day (1/country).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com