GVU - Criticism

Criticism

In January 2006 the GVU was itself under investigation. The state prosecution of Ellwangen accused the association of having promoted the illegal distribution of copyrighted material. As the accusation details the association had allegedly had financial dealings with an administrator of the so-called IOH server, over which numerous release groups had collected and distributed copied content. In addition, the association has been accused of directly provided hardware for the operation of the server.

During the course of the investigation the business premises of the GVU in Hamburg, as well as the home of a senior employee, were searched. The GVU has officially confirmed the raid and, according to the authorities, made available all of the information. Due to the particular urgency of the case, the action gained widespread media attention. However, suspicions against the association have not been confirmed. The investigation has since halted.

Also, during another investigation, the role of the GVU was criticised: The Kiel District Court said that during the course of proceedings against a suspected software pirates, it is essential to ensure the independence of police investigative work. Specifically, there were complaints that an employee of the GVU had worked as an expert in the process and at the same time had a free hand in the analysis of seized computers. The requirement of impartiality, not only for judges but also for prosecutors and the police had, in their opinion, not been fully safeguarded. Investigating authorities were prohibited to privatize their work.

Also, the strategy of the GVU in luring software pirates through a so-called honey pot trap has remained a subject of criticism. For example, during the course a raid in autumn 2007 suspicions were raised that the GVU and other organizations had installed open FTP servers on network, intended for the use by release groups, thus enabling the determination release group members based on their IP address. According to the unanimous opinion of experts, this approach is, at least leagally, unobjectionable.

Individual media outlets have criticised the GVU’s close proximity to lawyers, prosecutors, police and internet service providers, although naturally these kind of co-operations are part of the work of any interest group. The Association’s close cooperation with various other organizations is repeatedly criticized, especially during its annual Industry Forum.

In August 2010, the GVU was suspected of having caused the unjustified removal of several posts on the video platform Vimeo, which had been published under a Creative Commons license and are therefore available to all. Among other contents, "You are a terrorist" and "Electric Reporter" were affected. During the course of the investigation into the case it was revealed that the removal of the content was not initiated by the association, but by the company OpSec Security, based in Munich. The authors Alexander Lehmann and Mario Sixtus were able to obtain an injunction against the company and the GVU has since explicitly distanced its selves from the company. According to the GVU, OpSec Security had at no point been contracted to clear videos from Vimeo in its name.