Italian Justice System Strikes Again--Google Execs Convicted of Privacy Violations

[illram]

Link

Italian Prosecutors are up to their old tricks. Google Executives were tried and convicted a few days ago of violating Italian Privacy laws for failing to adequately police YouTube. The conviction stems from Google's failure to remove a video of Italian teenagers bullying another youth with down syndrome. The video unfortunately became extremely popular, but was not removed until Italian officials issued a formal complaint.

Although the EU has similar Notice and Take Down provisions to the US, Italian Prosecutors decided to try Google anyway--in absentia, of course, because the Italian criminal justice system is obviously completely insane.

An Italian court has convicted three current and former Google executives on privacy violations. Google says it will appeal the convictions, the first against employees of the world's most popular Internet search engine.

The case was closely followed for its implications on Internet freedom in Italy and elsewhere in Europe.

If this judgment stands, it will be a little like prosecuting the postman for delivering a letter you don't like the content of.

- Google spokesman Bill Echikson

The case stems from a 2006 incident when students at an Italian high school shot a video and uploaded the clip to Google's Italian Web site showing them bullying a schoolmate with Down syndrome.

The Google executives were tried in absentia and the court sentenced them to six-month suspended sentences, but acquitted them of defamation charges.

Bill Echikson, a Google spokesman, said after Wednesday's ruling: "This is a terrible, astonishing decision. It attacks the very principle of freedom on which the Internet is built."

But prosecutor Alfredo Robledo, reflecting European concerns about privacy issues, said what was at stake was not freedom of expression on the Internet but the responsibility of companies.

"We forcefully raised the principle that the right to do business can never prevail over fundamental human rights," Robledo said. "This is the clear sense of this ruling, this is what we had asked for and we are very satisfied."

Google says it took the video down within two hours after it had been notified by police.

But prosecutors argued that it shot to the top of the "most entertaining videos" on the Italian site and had 5,500 hits and 800 comments during the two months it was online — implying Google should have noticed it sooner.

According to Google statistics, 20 hours of video are uploaded to its sites every minute worldwide.

The four bullies were later identified, with the assistance of Google, and sentenced to community service.

Echikson said the implications of the Milan ruling would lead to pre-emptive screening, which he said is unfeasible both technically and financially. "This sort of regime where you can post and then notice and take-down regime allows creativity, allows the Web to flourish, as we have seen," he added.

"If this judgment stands, it will be a little like prosecuting the postman for delivering a letter you don't like the content of. Are we going to prosecute the postman? The telephone operator that carries the call where unpleasant things are said? No, obviously not," he said.

The U.S. ambassador to Italy, David Thorne, echoed that view, saying in a statement: "We are disappointed by today's decision sentencing executives of Google, Inc., in connection with the posting of an offensive video on Google. While we recognize the reprehensible nature of the material, we disagree that Internet service providers are responsible prior to posting for the content uploaded by users."

He added, "The fundamental principle of Internet freedom is vital for democracies which value freedom of expression and is protected by those who value liberty."

Italy appears to be unfriendly to the Internet: broadband is not easily available in parts of the country and the law requires users to show an ID before getting access at WiFi hot spots.

The ruling against Google came just as the Italian government is about to introduce a decree that would give the state control over online video content — the toughest Internet regulations in Europe.

Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi owns the biggest private TV conglomerate in Italy.

Google has been hit with a lawsuit for copyright infringement from Berlusconi's company Mediaset, which is seeking nearly $800 million in damages.

Adding to its woes, Google is facing a European Union probe following antitrust complaints filed by rival companies.

What a joke. It must be pretty unfulfilling to be an Italian Prosecutor. You can concoct all these brilliant prosecutions only to have the defendant never serve their sentence, because they never showed up. That sure is some sweet hot justice!

Although I agree with commentators outrage at the story, I disagree with all the fuss people are making about this being some huge blow to Internet freedom. It's freakin Italy. Who cares? Is anyone honestly going to severely restrict internet freedom because some crackpot court decides to throw around worthless prosecutions? No. China, a country of over a billion people, is about as authoritarian as they come regarding the Internet, and yet we here in the good ol USA still have the God Given Right to watch two women poop in a cup and eat it and then throw it up all over each other. Just like the founding fathers wanted.

Thoughts?

 

[galdre]

you'd think they'd be more concerned with the bullying

 

[illram]

Good point. I'm assuming that if they didn't prosecute the bullies already they could just whip up a quick trial and get it over with. No need to find the bullies first anyway, right Italy?

 

[holy king]

the suspects are outside of italy's jurisdiction, italy cant just kidnap them from foreign soil.

they have every right to attend the trial, if they choose not to defend themselves, tough luck.

 

[illram]

Yeah, and then Italy gets the pleasure of...a piece of paper saying they're guilty. Whooptydoo, what does that accomplish? Nothing other than making the look silly.

 

[Cheetah]

Good point. I'm assuming that if they didn't prosecute the bullies already they could just whip up a quick trial and get it over with. No need to find the bullies first anyway, right Italy?

Actually, both the bullies and the guy who uploaded the video had already been convicted earlier. And they are in Italy of course, so they do get their punishments.

But it is very frightening that a service provider like Youtube/Google can be punished for what people do with their service.

Slippery slope argument: Let's prosecute the postal systems for all the crimes they help facilitate, and all people who have been involved in the development, production, marketing or sale of an item that was later used to commit crimes (think guns and murders to make this argument more interesting).

 

[Little Raven]

As long as it's just Italy, well, Google should simply stop doing business in Italy. Problem solved.

If Italy can force this result throughout the EU, then there's cause for concern.

 

[amadeus]

Oh, Italy... there's a reason we only gave you Somalia for your colonial desires.

 

[bhsup]

I honestly do not have an issues with this. All of the content is hosted by youtube.com at THEIR own domain. If they don't want to get in trouble for things being on it, then they need to implement a pre-approval system to certify videos before they are made available for viewing after being uploaded.

When I ran my own BBS back in the early 90s, I never just allowed any random upload to be made available. I screened every upload for viruses as well as content before making it available. Google/Youtube can bloody well do the same, or be held responsible for their content.

To those who will respond that it isn't feasible because of the volume, that's Google/Youtube's problem. "Too big to fail certify??"

 

[Little Raven]

So you believe that Thunderfall should personally inspect every single comment before it goes live on this site?

After all, it's his site. He's responsible for anything we say here, right?

 

[warpus]

Link

Italian Prosecutors are up to their old tricks. Google Executives were tried and convicted a few days ago of violating Italian Privacy laws for failing to adequately police YouTube. The conviction stems from Google's failure to remove a video of Italian teenagers bullying another youth with down syndrome. The video unfortunately became extremely popular, but was not removed until Italian officials issued a formal complaint.

Actually, no, they were charged because they gave out the names of the people who put up the video, which is what broke Italian law.

From what I've read about this.. could be wrong.

 

[bhsup]

Technically, considering the official line is that anything posted here is this site's property, then yes maybe.

 

[Little Raven]

That's fine, in terms of logical consistency. But it would absolutely end the internet as we know it. Google, Facebook, LinkedIn, Monster, every forum/chatroom...all of it would effectively cease to be.

I suspect relatively few people are interested in going that route.

 

[Bill3000]

Technically, considering the official line is that anything posted here is this site's property, then yes maybe.

This isn't true, legally speaking, within the United States. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act states that "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

 

[illram]

I honestly do not have an issues with this. All of the content is hosted by youtube.com at THEIR own domain. If they don't want to get in trouble for things being on it, then they need to implement a pre-approval system to certify videos before they are made available for viewing after being uploaded.

When I ran my own BBS back in the early 90s, I never just allowed any random upload to be made available. I screened every upload for viruses as well as content before making it available. Google/Youtube can bloody well do the same, or be held responsible for their content.

To those who will respond that it isn't feasible because of the volume, that's Google/Youtube's problem. "Too big to fail certify??"

The consequences of holding web site owners and ISPs responsible for content uploaded to them would basically mean, say, waiting a month for your Youtube video to be posted, or paying a premium fee to use the site to pay for all the internet cops you would need to moderate the billions and billions of megabytes uploaded every day to sites across the web. Or just not having these sites at all.

Actually, no, they were charged because they gave out the names of the people who put up the video, which is what broke Italian law.

From what I've read about this.. could be wrong.

Where did you read that? Every article I've read just talks about Italy being p.o.'d over the fact that Google didn't take down the video. The NPR story says Google only released the names to Italian authorities in order to find the bullies...?

 

[warpus]

Where did you read that? Every article I've read just talks about Italy being p.o.'d over the fact that Google didn't take down the video. The NPR story says Google only released the names to Italian authorities in order to find the bullies...?

Reddit.. heavily upvoted comment and discussion with links.. can't find it anymore.

Very possible that it's bs, but I do remember it being somewhat convincing at the time of reading.

 

[bhsup]

This isn't true, legally speaking, within the United States. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act states that "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

But what about responsibility for facilitating the dissemination of illegal information? That should still be on the hoster.

The consequences of holding web site owners and ISPs responsible for content uploaded to them would basically mean, say, waiting a month for your Youtube video to be posted, or paying a premium fee to use the site to pay for all the internet cops you would need to moderate the billions and billions of megabytes uploaded every day to sites across the web. Or just not having these sites at all.

And? I'm really not seeing the issue here.

 

[warpus]

@VRWCAgent it would mean the death of forums such as these .. and that would suck!

 

[Little Raven]

But what about responsibility for facilitating the dissemination of illegal information? That should still be on the hoster.

Do you also believe the phone company should be prosecuted every time someone discusses illegal material over their lines? Shouldn't they have screened that call in advance?

 

[bhsup]

@VRWCAgent it would mean the death of forums such as these .. and that would suck!

Do you also believe the phone company should be prosecuted every time someone discusses illegal material over their lines? Shouldn't they have screened that call in advance?

Phone calls are private conversations not available to the public at large and not accessible by the phone companies. Now to address warpus' concern, we could accomplish the same, possibly, by making this a private, closed, pay forum.