German courts treat web archives with surprising sophistication – and surprising contradiction. Our newly compiled legal framework considers how civil proceedings demand stricter authentication than criminal cases, despite lower constitutional stakes. Notarised web captures receive presumptive authenticity1, while screenshots face judicial skepticism regardless of reliability.
The framework maps a fragmented landscape where mandatory electronic filing since 20222 collides with authentication standards designed for analogue evidence. The Internet Archive gains approval for patent prior art3 but rejection for contract enforcement. Professional archiving services with qualified timestamps trump simple screenshots. eIDAS harmonisation accelerates acceptance, yet authentication infrastructure remains essential – not optional.
For practitioners navigating Germany’s §286 ZPO4 free evaluation regime versus §371a ZPO’s enhanced presumptions, this analysis decodes the authentication hierarchy determining whether digital evidence survives or fails. The dichotomy is stark: proper technical competence now separates winning arguments from malpractice liability.
This legal analysis is available exclusively by request. Please email at hi@digitalevidencetoolkit.org.