I Googled ".........." Nothing came up
Perhaps you know; not even 13% of the people in the EU are native English speakers so also a relatively small part of the news articles in the EU, are in English.
Some samples:
??:
Fahndung auf Facebook - was ist eigentlich erlaubt?
www.derwesten.de
About forwarding unproven crimes and the names and pictures of the perpetrators. About 11.000 people have forwarded a Facebook post with a picture of an alleged pedophile. All these people could be held responsible to publish a libel and therefore be charged and having to pay €5.000 in damages.
??:
Miljoenen keren werden ze bekeken, de camerabeelden die bloemist Johan Kools op Facebook zette. Hij wilde aandacht vragen voor een diefstal door een oudere vrouw. Dat doen meer winkels, maar mag dat wel?
www.rtlnieuws.nl
The owner of a flower shop put a CCTV recording online in which you can see that an elderly woman in a scootmobile takes some small plants and leaves without paying for them. Many shares but now he's under scrutiny of the authorities.
??:
www.rtbf.be
Eén winkelier op de 5 heeft in 2016 camerabeelden van inbrekers of vandalen verspreid. “Het is de efficiëntste manier om dieven te klissen”, klinkt het bij ondernemersorganisatie NSZ. Het gebeurt vaak en het werkt, maar het mag niet.
m.nieuwsblad.be
Qriginal quote:
Reinart Swertvaegher, een hotelier uit Brugge, werd begin deze maand overvallen door twee jongens. Op de bewakingsbeelden was te zien hoe twee jonge mannen al glimlachend de peperdure mountainbike van €7.500 stalen. En alsof dat nog niet genoeg was, wuifden ze nog eens naar de camera ook.
De hoteleigenaar bezorgde de beelden bij de politie en besloot om deze ook op facebook te zetten tegen het advies van de politie in. Het probleem is dat Swertvaegher zelf de wet heeft overtreden door de filmpjes te posten. “De wet op de privacy is er om burgers te beschermen”, reageert de Privacycommissie op het voorval. “Het is niet aan burgers om onderzoek te voeren, dat is de taak van de politie.” Het is dus mogelijk dat de hoteleigenaar voor de inbreuk een boete tot 6.000 euro krijgt.
Translated quote:
Reinart Swertvaegher, a hotelier from Bruges was burglarized by two boys earlier this month. The security footage showed how two young men, smiling, stole an expensive mountain bike of € 7,500. And as if that wasn't enough, they also waved at the camera. The hotel owner delivered the images to the police and decided to put them on Facebook against the advice of the police. The problem is that Swertvaegher himself has broken the law by posting the videos. "The privacy law is there to protect citizens," the Privacy Commission responds to the incident. "It is not the task of citizens to conduct investigations, that is the task of the police." It is therefore possible that the hotel owner will be fined up to 6,000 euros for the infringement.
?? :
Après avoir été victime d'un cambriolage, il peut être tentant de diffuser les images de vidéo-surveillance sur internet afin d'identifier le coupable. Mais attention au retour de bâton.
www.europe1.fr
Original quote:
Tout voleur présumé a droit à la présomption d'innocence et à la protection de sa vie privée, dont l'image fait partie", explique Roland Pérez, juriste et chroniqueur, sur Europe 1 vendredi. Il rappelle notamment l'histoire d'un vol de sacoche dans un cabinet de dentiste, dont la vidéo publiée sur Facebook a atteint 200.000 vues. Suite à ça, le dentiste s'est retrouvé devant le tribunal pour atteinte à la présomption d'innocence et atteinte à l'image.
Translated:
Any suspected thief has the right to the presumption of innocence and the protection of his private life, whose image is part of it ", explains Roland Pérez, jurist and columnist, on Europe 1 Friday. He reminds us of the theft of a satchel in a dentist's office, which video posted on Facebook reached 200,000 views. And it was followed by the dentist going to court for violating the presumption of innocence and damaging someone's good name.
This is a real (and father funny) Dutch COURT case about posting pictures of someone caught in the act:
LJN: AQ7877, Rechtbank Amsterdam , KG 04/1566 SR Datum uitspraak: 26-08-2004 Datum publicatie: 26-08-2004 Rechtsgebied: Civiel overig Soort procedure: Kort geding Inhoud
www.onlinecamerashop.nl
Google Translate of the conclusion:
DECISION IN COURT CASE:
The preliminary relief judge:
1. Condemns [defendant] within one working day after serving this judgment in his shop for four days on which the shop is open all day, to hang the following text where the photo of [plaintiff] has hung:
"Rectification.
The court in preliminary relief proceedings ruled in its judgment of 26 August 2004 that by hanging the photo of a 79-year-old woman at this place, with the text "This woman stole here", I acted unlawfully against this woman because it is in violation with the law. The judge in interlocutory proceedings ordered me to hang this text for four days.
[defendant].",
the dimensions and font being the same as the dimensions of the photo and the accompanying text,
on pain of a penalty of € 500.00 per day or part of a day that [defendant] does not comply with this conviction, with a maximum of € 10,000.00.
2. Instructs [defendant] to destroy the (copies of) the photo of [plaintiff] still in his possession, on pain of a penalty of € 1,000.00 for each (copy of) a photo of [plaintiff], which he still has in his possession four days after service of this judgment.
3. Declares this judgment to be immediately enforceable.
4. Compensates for the costs of the proceedings in such a way that each party bears its own costs.
5. Rejects the more or otherwise advanced.
Declared by XXXXX, vice-president of the Amsterdam District Court, and pronounced at the public hearing on Thursday, August 26, 2004, in the presence of the clerk.
.jpg)
.jpg)
