When a case is bigger
than the individual case.

Criminal complaints against Facebook executives

Public Prosecutor’s Office Munich I (previously Hamburg)

Chan-jo Jun filed criminal complaints (Strafanzeigen) against Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg, and other Facebook executives for aiding and abetting incitement to hatred (Volksverhetzung). The company was accused of failing to delete calls for murder, threats of violence, Holocaust denial, and other criminal content despite being aware of it.

The public prosecutor’s office did not open formal investigations. However, the initiative attracted worldwide media attention.

SignificanceThe proceedings are considered a contributing factor in the introduction of the Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz (NetzDG — Network Enforcement Act), which from 2018 obliged social networks to delete criminal content and is regarded as the predecessor of the Digital Services Act (DSA).

Modamani ./. Facebook

Landgericht Würzburg (Würzburg Regional Court)

On behalf of the Syrian refugee Anas Modamani — whose selfie with Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel was linked to terrorist attacks and crimes in fabricated posts — the firm sought a preliminary injunction against Facebook to stop the dissemination of these posts.

With these proceedings, Facebook appeared before a German court for the first time. The application for interim relief was unsuccessful before the Landgericht Würzburg, as the court held that the network could not reasonably be required to delete all copies on an ongoing basis.

SignificanceThe case attracted international attention and significantly shaped the legislative debate on the responsibility of platforms for unlawful content.

Künast ./. Meta — fabricated quote

Landgericht Frankfurt am Main · Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main (Higher Regional Court) · Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice)

Renate Künast, a member of the German Bundestag for the Green Party, is defending herself — supported by HateAid and represented by JUN Legal GmbH — against a fabricated quote falsely attributed to her that was spread as a meme via Facebook.

The Landgericht Frankfurt am Main and the Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main ordered Meta to remove the fabricated quote including all “kerngleich” variants, i.e. essentially identical versions. The Bundesgerichtshof is hearing the final appeal; it had stayed the proceedings in February 2025 to await a landmark decision by the European Court of Justice on platforms’ proactive review obligations. That decision has since been issued in the Russmedia judgment — the BGH has resumed the proceedings (as of May 2026).

SignificanceA groundbreaking clarification of whether platforms must proactively remove essentially identical fabricated quotes once a legal violation has become known to them.

In cooperation with HateAid

Blume ./. Twitter

Landgericht Frankfurt am Main

On behalf of Dr. Michael Blume, the Commissioner for Combating Antisemitism of the State of Baden-Württemberg, the firm obtained a preliminary injunction against Twitter in December 2022. The background was a defamation campaign involving false statements of fact, a large portion of which had remained online despite being reported.

The Landgericht Frankfurt ordered the platform to permanently remove the unlawful content — including all “kerngleich” (essentially identical) statements — and not to restore it in the future. Although this decision was later overturned at a subsequent stage of the proceedings, the assessments and statements on platform liability made in the course of these proceedings remained groundbreaking.

SignificanceImportant clarifications on the scope of the removal obligations under the NetzDG: the debate on whether platforms must remove not only the reported post but also repetitions that convey the same meaning was significantly advanced by these proceedings.

In cooperation with HateAid

SAIC / MG — open-source licenses

Landgericht München I

Proceedings against SAIC Motor Deutschland GmbH, the German importer of the MG Motor brand — a subsidiary of the Chinese SAIC group — are pending before the Landgericht München I. The subject matter is the software built into the MG4 Electric model, which relies heavily on open-source components.

What makes this case special: the mandatory notices for open-source software were missing entirely. Neither copyright notices nor license texts nor access to the source code could be found — and nothing was provided even upon express request. As a result, the necessary rights of use under copyright law to the vehicle software are lacking.

SignificanceA precedent-setting case on the FOSS compliance of software-defined vehicles — with wider significance for the growing market of imported automobiles from Chinese manufacturers.