Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
Perhaps, since "Mitstörerhaftung" is used so widely in an Internet context, the workaround should qualify "accessory liability" as "accessory liability for disturbance of the peace". In that case "Störerhaftung" also widely used, would be "liability for disturbance of the peace". What is the opinion of the KudoZ legal eagles??
Automatic update in 00:
2 hrs confidence:
Explanation: A workaround. Mithaftung = accessory liability, leaving out the "störer" part, which is not really necessary in the context IMO.
Alexander Schleber Belgium Local time: 21:40 Specializes in field Native speaker of: German, English PRO pts in category: 97