Volker Schwaberow
Volker Schwaberow
Imprint terror in Germany
Table of Contents

Introduction

Welcome to my new blog. During my work as a cybersecurity professional, I often come across new and interesting topics or even thought provoking ideas. It is vital to share these ideas with others to learn from each other. And that is why I decided to start this blog.

Germany’s imprint terror

But let’s start with a short rant. Germany’s imprint terror is something that I have been thinking about for a long time. It is a topic that is widely discussed in the circle of bloggers in Germany, but maybe not in english mode.

In Germany, websites must comply with § 5 TMG (Telemediengesetz) and § 55 RStV (Rundfunkstaatsvertrag) and now the Digitale-Dienste-Gesetz, which require:

  1. Full name and address of the website operator
  2. Contact information (email, phone)
  3. Commercial register details if applicable
  4. VAT identification number if applicable

The problem

For most content creators, starting a blog or website is as simple as clicking a few buttons. But in Germany, would-be creators face a bureaucratic nightmare that drives many into silence—or underground. Welcome to the world of Impressumspflicht, Germany’s draconian website identification laws that suffocate digital innovation in Europe’s largest economy.

Under German law (specifically § 5 TMG and § 55 RStV), every website operator must publicly display their full name, physical address, and contact information. For businesses, this extends to commercial registry details and tax IDs. Sounds reasonable for major corporations, right? The problem is that this law applies to everyone—from multinational companies to teenage bloggers working from their bedrooms.

The consequences

These concerns aren’t theoretical. In September 2024, a prominent German Linux developer became the victim of a swatting attack during a live stream1. While broadcasting technical content about Linux development, armed police officers stormed the developer’s office after receiving a false emergency call. The incident, captured live on Twitch, demonstrates the dangers of Germany’s mandatory address disclosure laws. Swatting - where bad actors make false emergency calls to send armed police to someone’s location - represents one of the most dangerous forms of harassment enabled by forced address transparency.

The implications are staggering. While established businesses can list their office addresses, individual creators must expose their home addresses to the world. In an age when online harassment has become increasingly cultivated and dangerous, this requirement isn’t just inconvenient; it’s potentially life-threatening. The recent swatting incident proves that even operating from an office space doesn’t guarantee safety—the risks are even higher for home-based creators.

The financial barriers

But it’s not just about safety. The financial barriers are equally crushing. Before publishing their first post, creators must navigate complex legal requirements or face fines of up to €50,000.

The law’s defenders argue that these requirements promote accountability and combat online fraud. However, critics point out that bad actors ignore the rules while legitimate creators suffer. Female content creators and activists are particularly vulnerable, facing heightened risks of stalking and harassment. Many simply choose not to publish, creating what privacy advocates call a “chilling effect” on digital expression.

The result

The result? The German internet is increasingly dominated by corporate voices while independent creators retreat to international platforms or abandon their projects entirely. As other countries embrace the creator economy, Germany’s regulatory framework seems stuck in the pre-digital age, raising questions about the future of online innovation in one of Europe’s most important markets.

Some creators have found workarounds, like using address protection services as legal proxies. But these solutions come with their own costs – both financial and practical. Monthly fees for such services can range from €30 to €200, adding yet another barrier to entry for aspiring creators.

For me, the September 2024 swatting incident is the best example of what is at stake. While the Linux developer was fortunate enough to have the incident documented on stream – bringing attention to the issue – countless other creators face similar risks without public awareness.

For now, creators are left with uncomfortable choices: pay for expensive address protection services, limit their creative ambitions, or simply move their digital presence offshore. In an era where digital content creation drives cultural and economic growth, Germany’s imprint requirements aren’t just outdated – they’re actively harmful to the country’s creative future.

As the global creator economy continues to boom, Germany risks falling behind. It is trapped by regulations conceived in a pre-internet era and never properly updated for the digital age. Without reform, the country’s next generation of digital innovators may find themselves forced to choose between their safety and their creativity—or worse, choosing not to create at all.


Footnotes

  1. Swatting: Open-Source-Entwickler vor laufender Kamera durch Polizei abgeführt