limited exclusively to the abstract attribution of number and subscriber.
cc) In contrast, the situation is different when dynamic IP addresses are attributed to
identified persons, for such addresses are particularly closely related to specific
telecommunications events. This attribution is within the area of protection of Article
10.1 of the Basic Law. However, here too this does not automatically follow from the
fact that the attribution of a dynamic IP address necessarily always relates to a specific telecommunications event of which it therefore indirectly also provides information.
For in this connection too the information itself only relates to data which are abstractly attributed to a subscriber. There is therefore no fundamental difference from the attribution of static IP addresses. However, the application of Article 10.1 of the Basic
Law is here based on the fact that when the telecommunications enterprises identify
a dynamic IP address, they have to take an intermediate step, in which they examine
the relevant connection data of their customers, that is, must access specific telecommunications events. These telecommunications connections individually stored by
the service providers are subject to the secrecy of telecommunications, irrespective
of whether they have to be kept available by the service providers under a statutory
duty (see BVerfGE 125, 260 <312-313>) or whether they are stored by them on a
contractual basis. Insofar as the legislature imposes a duty on the telecommunications enterprises to access these data and to evaluate them in the interest of the
state’s performance of its duties, this is an encroachment upon Article 10.1 of the Basic Law. This is the case not only if the service providers must supply the connection
data themselves, but also if they have to use the data as a preliminary question for information.
116
b) In conclusion, § 111 and § 112 TKG do not affect the secrecy of telecommunications. In contrast, § 113.1 TKG encroaches upon Article 10.1 of the Basic Law to the
extent that it is a basis for the supply of information on dynamic IP addresses. Apart
from this, § 113.1 TKG too is not to be measured against Article 10.1 of the Basic
Law.
117
The storage required in § 111.1, 111.2 TKG relates exclusively to the abstract attribution of numbers, line identification numbers and identifiers of email accounts to
specific subscribers who are more closely identified. It therefore does not encroach
upon Article 10.1 of the Basic Law. According to the above standards, this applies irrespective of whether, under non-constitutional law, the static IP addresses are also
to be deemed to be line identification numbers under § 111.1 sentence 1 TKG. Under
§ 111.1, 111.2 TKG, specific communications connections are not subject to the duty
of storage.
118
Similarly, information under §§ 112 and 113 TKG does not encroach upon the secrecy of telecommunications. For information with regard to the data stored under
§ 111 TKG, this is a clear consequence of the above remarks. But the same applies
insofar as § 113.1 TKG in addition covers the data stored by the service providers under § 95.1 TKG. For the data known as customer data which are permissibly stored
119
24/45