What Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf’s Social Media Reform Proposal Would Mean for German Internet Users
A German legal scholar who was blocked from becoming a constitutional judge after a coordinated smear campaign is now pushing for a straightforward change to how social media platforms handle user data. Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf, a professor of public law at the University of Potsdam, wants platforms to be required to collect and store the real names and physical addresses of every user at registration. The information would stay hidden behind a pseudonym during normal use, but would be handed over to authorities when a user commits a crime or violates someone else’s rights.
That mechanism, known in German law as an Auskunftsanspruch (right to information), is already common in other areas – for example, copyright holders can force internet providers to reveal the IP address of an alleged infringer. Brosius-Gersdorf argues that the same principle should apply to social media. If a person is threatened, defamed, or harassed online, they currently have to identify the perpetrator themselves, which is often impossible behind a pseudonym. Under her model, the victim would have a legal claim against the platform to hand over the registered name and address, enabling civil lawsuits or criminal charges.
The proposal does not ban anonymity. Users could still post under a made-up handle. But the platform would know who they really are. That changes the threat calculation for people who use anonymity as a shield to attack others. The reform would require a change to Germany’s Telemediengesetz (Telemedia Act) or the NetzDG (Network Enforcement Act), and would likely trigger a debate about data privacy and the right to anonymous speech under the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
Brosius-Gersdorf knows the problem firsthand. In July 2025, she was the SPD’s nominee for a seat on the Federal Constitutional Court. Her candidacy collapsed after a wave of online abuse and a political fight within the governing coalition. She later told the Tagesspiegel that she was called a “left-wing, life-hostile death cult” representative and a “judge of horror.” The attacks, she said, were orchestrated by right-wing nationalist circles and amplified by new media outlets. The experience pushed her to write a book about the affair, published in September 2026, and to speak publicly about the structural weaknesses in Germany’s current approach to online hate.
Why this matters beyond her personal story. German courts and police have struggled for years to prosecute online hate speech because anonymous accounts are difficult to trace. Platforms often refuse to cooperate, citing privacy laws or pointing to their terms of service. The result is a perception that the internet is a lawless space. Brosius-Gersdorf’s proposal would shift the burden from the victim to the platform, creating a clear legal duty to identify offenders. Critics worry that mandatory registration could chill legitimate political speech, especially for dissidents or whistleblowers. But the proposal carves out an exception: the real name is only revealed when a crime is committed, not at the moment of posting.
The debate touches on a fundamental tension in modern democracy: how to preserve the openness of the internet while curbing the toxicity that drives people away. Brosius-Gersdorf’s answer is to borrow a proven tool from other legal fields and apply it to social media.
Sources
- Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf im Gespräch: „Erschreckend zu sehen, mit welchen Mitteln gearbeitet wird“
- Social Media: Juristin Brosius-Gersdorf fordert besseren Schutz vor Hass im Netz
- Brosius-Gersdorf: Anfeindungen im Netz „Stück meiner Normalität“
- Juristin Brosius-Gersdorf wirbt für Speicherung von echtem Namen und Adresse bei Sozialen Medien