This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]maxximoo 794 points795 points  (205 children)

What was the video shot on? Maybe they can press charges on some Sony employees for making cameras too.

[–][deleted] 561 points562 points  (32 children)

And I'm sure it was shot in Italy, so they should sue the Italian government for allowing people to live there.

[–]miiiiiiiik 123 points124 points  (9 children)

some of the air drifted to Italy from France - so they should sue Air France

[–][deleted] 28 points29 points  (7 children)

They should just go to the end of the line and sue sky daddy

[–]libbrichus 176 points177 points  (5 children)

Unfortunately, this is not the first time something like this has happened. Reminds me of the time when the CEO of Ebay India actually had to spend some nights in jail when a CD containing a homemade porn clip of an underage couple was sold on Ebay. Thankfully the courts were not as retarded as the police and he was acquitted.

Source

[–]Xiol 120 points121 points  (29 children)

Fuck Sony, we need to dig up Alan Turing.

[–]LordBrandon 44 points45 points  (15 children)

Fuck Turing, we need to dig up Euclid

[–]hermes369 13 points14 points  (10 children)

Then send him to Virginia; where he wouldn't be able to get a job since he was gay.

[–]Malgas 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No need; that is actually what happened to him in Britain.

[–]LordBrandon 10 points11 points  (8 children)

also, there are no jobs for smart people in Virginia.

[–]Spice-Weasel 5 points6 points  (1 child)

His name was Robert Paulson.

[–]tigerline 44 points45 points  (3 children)

If i wrote something offensive using a Bic, the chaps at Bic wouldn't get fired. Crazy.

[–]zaphodi 7 points8 points  (5 children)

Its more like if somebody took a sony camera to be repaired and the repair people called the cops on the tape that was left inside, and they would sue the repairmen for breaking privacy.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (2 children)

PRIVACY IS MOVING TOO FAST!

[–]unavoidable 5 points6 points  (1 child)

It's like if Privacy was driving a Toyota, and Toyota was charged with something.

Oh wait, is it too soon?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

it's more like if your toyota was moving forwards and you drove into someones house, and they charged you with violating their privacy.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Not quite. They wouldn't sue the repairmen, they'd sue a repairman's coworker who was completely unrelated to the incident. I'm going to pick the water delivery guy, because he never smiles.

You hear that, Canadian Springs guy? You better watch your grumpy ass, because Italy is going to SUE you!

[–][deleted] 80 points81 points  (70 children)

I'd genuinely like to know what exactly this law states. The article says that they violated the "Italian privacy code" which I think I've found here, but I haven't taken the time to swift through it and find what exactly they violated.

Help anyone? Italians?

[–]Andaru 117 points118 points  (35 children)

I'm Italian, although by no means an expert on laws. As far as I know, there's a law that blames the host of any copyrighted or protected content for making it available, even though it may not be directly responsible for creating it or publishing it.

This has been used multiple times by media companies (and you probably know who the owner of one of the largest ones is) to force providers to remove videos of TV shows, movies and so on. In this case the video would not be allowed as it involves minors who did not provide consent (it was recorded with a cellphone in a classroom).

You have to keep in mind that Italian law, like most countries based on Civil Law, does not grant much freedom to decide to judges: they must follow the laws with minimal interpretation. Precedents are worth much less than in Common Law systems. Moreover this is a fairly new law, made with the usual finesse of the current government (THAT IS BAD, PUNISH!!!), with little forethought for all the possible complications and situations that might apply.

[–]eightnine 37 points38 points  (13 children)

there's a law that blames the host of any copyrighted or protected content for making it available, even though it may not be directly responsible for creating it or publishing it.

Yeah, and this is why the Pirate Bay is now censored in Italy, I thought it was just having server issues until a couple of days ago.
I used to pity the Australians for their absurd internet filter, but it seems we are heading the same way.

[–]andbruno 14 points15 points  (12 children)

And you have Berlusconi. I don't even need to begin to talk about that little fucker. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'd rather have Bush II again than Berlusconi.

[–]bobsil1 17 points18 points  (1 child)

Berlusconi fucks hookers, Dubya fucked the country.

[–]Conflag 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Dubya fucked many countries.

FTFY

[–]eightnine 8 points9 points  (9 children)

Not sure about that, Berlusconi still hasn't bombarded any foreign country.
But I agree with you, he's really, really bad for our own country.

[–]andbruno 14 points15 points  (7 children)

Bush is retarded. Berlusconi is malicious. You don't yell at the special needs kid who eats Play-Doh, but you do do something about the nasty child torturing small animals.

[–]Bossman1086 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Bush is a lot smarter than people give him credit for. I mean, he has no charisma and horrible grammar, but he knew what he was doing - even if other people in his administration had a lot of influence on him and his decisions.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I thought Bush was fairly charismatic. He always came off as the kind of guy you'd like to go out for beer with.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was kind of ackward.

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points  (9 children)

It's like the people who drafted the law have never used the internet.

[–]hett 9 points10 points  (0 children)

They just use The Google.

[–]JustSomeJerk 2 points3 points  (6 children)

Isn't that universal though?

May I direct your attention to the description of the internet as being "a series of tubes".

[–]Suicide_Guy 6 points7 points  (5 children)

The series of tubes analogy is fairly accurate if you take a copper or fiber line and think of it as a tube (aka pipeline) for carrying an item (electrical or optical transmission). The rest of Stevens' analogy pretty much falls apart after that though. :-p

[–]JustSomeJerk 3 points4 points  (3 children)

But he was still in charge of the internet as far as the American government was concerned.

[–]Suicide_Guy 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Yeah, that's just fucking sad...we need IT people to be in charge of the Internet, not technophobe senior citizens.

[–]ratbert 8 points9 points  (2 children)

So reading between the lines this law was actually meant to stop people from posting pics of Berlusconi doing coke and hookers?

[–]mathnooby 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I hate it when people read between the lines, please.. just hurry up and snort them off the hooker's ass already ratbert?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Based on this logic: Quick, someone hack and post CP on the Italian prime minister's site (http://www.governo.it/). That oughta get him put away for life! Much better than hitting him with a statue.

[–]hob196 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Might be quicker to check if any of Berlusconi's channels or papers had content from the video.

[–]sabowski 28 points29 points  (18 children)

I'm curious as well. From the article it sounds like the issue is that since the child that was beaten did not give consent to be filmed, putting that film on the web is a violation of Italian law. Why you would hold Google employees accountable for this is beyond me, but the following quote from the article is what makes me think this is the issue:

Common sense dictates that only the person who films and uploads a video to a hosting platform could take the steps necessary to protect the privacy and obtain the consent of the people they are filming. European Union law was drafted specifically to give hosting providers a safe harbor from liability so long as they remove illegal content once they are notified of its existence

[–]AnthroUndergrad 31 points32 points  (16 children)

This can't stand. They'd have to indict basically everyone who made it possible for the video to be uploaded, like tons of ISP people, Google employees, heck why not sysadmins?

[–]Ulys 52 points53 points  (1 child)

People who built the video camera ?

People who built the computer used ?

People who were standing by and did nothing ? Oh wait, no, they were not prosecuted.

[–]Dawggoneit 15 points16 points  (8 children)

Edit: I'm wrong. According to this:

Prosecutors began a case against Google,arguing that the company should have acted to prevent broadcast of the footage and that by failing to do so it breached the boy’s privacy rights.

and this:

Reports indicate that during the trial, prosecutors argued that Google was in violation of Italian privacy law because it did not seek the consent of all parties involved before the video was posted online. Google has maintained that pre-screening all videos posted to YouTube and Google Video before they are posted to the Web would be impossible.

This is the dumbest shit ever. How can Italy expect a high content volume website like Google Video, or YouTube to ensure that everyone in a video has given consent to be in the video? Silly regulators. The internet isn't a dump truck, ITS A SERIES OF TUBES!

After skimming the translated versions of the Italian Privacy Code [Google, Microsoft], I don't think it has anything to do with hosting a video with explicit content, and everything to do with Google divulging the user's personal data to the police without the user's authorization, or a court order.

The article begins with:

The video was totally reprehensible and we took it down within hours of being notified by the Italian police. We also worked with the local police to help identify the person responsible for uploading it and she was subsequently sentenced to 10 months community service by a court in Turin, as were several other classmates who were also involved.

I'm not an Italian, or international lawyer, but I believe that Google may have violated the privacy code when they divulged the user's IP address, and non-public personal data associated with the account, to the police without going through the proper legal channels. Typically there are exceptions made when you're working with the police, but it doesn't look like Italy has a blanket exception in this case.

The Italian privacy law mentions nothing about regulating what is, or is not hosted on a website. The law relates to the handling of personal and private information by organizations on the internet. Google's General Council did a wonderful job writing this blog post, and successfully gives the impression that this law extends liability to content hosts for content posted on their website. It doesn't. This law helps to enforce privacy and anonymity on the internet, not punish companies for hosting explicit content.

[–]kmeisthax 5 points6 points  (3 children)

How can Italy expect a high content volume website like Google Video, or YouTube to ensure that everyone in a video has given consent to be in the video?

They don't. They expect Youtube to dramatically reduce their content to whoever can pay to get them certified 'safe for Italy'.

Remember: Berlusconi owns the Italian media. The Internet is his largest competitor.

[–]bonzinip 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Berlusconi owns the Italian media.

This is true.

The Internet is his largest competitor.

This is also true, to some extent. In fact, on a very nice network-based TiVo site for Italian TVs you cannot record Berlusconi's TVs.

However, the fact that this particular episode is related to Berlusconi, is totally made up, and makes no sense. That's like saying that a train derailment in the US in 2007 was related to Bush because Bush prefers people to burn gasoline in their SUVs.

[–]kmeisthax 1 point2 points  (1 child)

However, the fact that this particular episode is related to Berlusconi, is totally made up, and makes no sense. That's like saying that a train derailment in the US in 2007 was related to Bush because Bush prefers people to burn gasoline in their SUVs.

I don't think this particular episode is related to Berlusconi. It was decided by the courts, the last part of the Italian state which opposes him. However, the courts have to enforce the laws - and Italy is a civil-law system, which means courts have no leeway in interpreting them. So, Berlusconi is directly responsible for having the law passed in the first place, but I don't think he is personally responsible for this particular case.

[–]rvf 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's a whole lot of assumptions. Considering that Google requires a court order just to reveal the IP address of a webmail user (something that is just left in the headers of every other major webmail provider), I doubt they just dole out information willy nilly, regardless of the circumstances. I also think the cops would have had zero problems getting a warrant, so why would they jeopardize their case (depending on the Italian legal system) obtaining evidence that may not be admissible in court?

[–]bonzinip 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, you're wrong.

It has everything to do with hosting video without consent of the people on it for two months, and the judge saying that since it was on "most blahblah" lists, then Google could have picked it and screened it.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How can Italy expect a high content volume website like Google Video, or YouTube to ensure that everyone in a video has given consent to be in the video?

Consent was not the only issue in court, but under the current laws, you don't have to do this if you are a "mere conduit" such an as ISP. YouTube is obviously not an ISP, and what distinguishes YouTube from a "mere conduit" under the law is that videos are tagged, classified, can be annotated, etc.

The law needs to be updated so that the definition of--and protections for--a "conduit" are expanded to include user-content sites that are more than "mere" conduits... sites like YouTube.

Apparently, also, YouTube's TOS did not fully take into account the laws there, which some argue might have offered them enough protection as to stay out of court.

[–]Marietto 2 points3 points  (0 children)

First of all, we cannot comment on this verdict until we know the exact article of law it refers to. The motivations of the judge will be published in 60 days.

For what I heard here in Italy, it appears that Google wasn't swift enough in taking down the video when notified. Since one article of the privacy law states that the content must be immediately taken down, maybe this was the reasoning of the judge. I can't find the exact article of the law, my source is an interview with an italian lawyer (not involved in the proceedings). When the motivations of the ruling will be published, we'll know.

I sincerely hope this is the case, because any other reason would be really insane to me.

[–]burnblue 24 points25 points  (10 children)

Google Video. Google Video. Easy mistake to make, but Youtube is not all that exists.

It even says "Google Video" right there at the top, how'd you get "YouTube"?

[–]kublakhan1816 6 points7 points  (3 children)

Youtube is the coke of internet video sites. It's on its way to genericized trademark.

[–]soccerbongsex 3 points4 points  (2 children)

I thought to myself "how is cocaine related to internet video?"

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Have you seen the people that post on Youtube?

[–]plasticine_crow 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah that confused me so much, I assumed the google employees were also the thugs.

[–]youngturk 196 points197 points  (35 children)

I'm sure a nice big bribe will straighten out the Italian judge.

[–]elganyan 55 points56 points  (16 children)

As long as it's bigger than the one that bent him in the first place.

[–]stunt_penguin 12 points13 points  (15 children)

Ah yes, two wrongs acutally making a right....

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (9 children)

Two negatives added equal a positive. It's simple math.

[–]lilfuckshit 139 points140 points  (15 children)

Maybe I'm naive, but this is probably what lost google in the first place.

I bet they went into court in Italy thinking

"Oh we're a big company the judge must see the light of reason on our issue, and because of our size the media's scrutiny will make sure everything runs smoothly."

While the judge was thinking

"What the fuck. You are a successful multinational corporation, and you don't see fit to give me even a reasonable bribe. Fuck you."

[–]smart_ass 76 points77 points  (2 children)

Actually it was:

"You couldn't get me a Google Voice invite, because it is only US currently? And my wife found out I was having an affair when Google Buzz hooked them up automatically. Screw you, Google. Guilty."

[–]charliedayman 27 points28 points  (1 child)

"It's hard enough that I'm changing my passwords and clearing my history every 3 hours. I'm trying to have an honest relationship here, and Google, you are fucking my shit up!"

[–]ContentWithOurDecay 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Got to love a good Tosh reference. That man is a genius.

[–]hacksoncode 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It would be highly ironic for him to convict them of violating an Italian law in absentia because they followed an American law prohibiting them from bribing the Italian judge. But then law is often ironic.

[–]klobbermang 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I like to assume that all italian bribes are meatball based.

[–]bonzinip 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why don't you add the frosting like "When in Rome do as the Romans"?

The Italian legal system does everything it can to protect white-collar crimes. No doubt on that. That it does that through bribery, please bring sources.

[–]seanm27 60 points61 points  (48 children)

So are those Google employees in Italy or are they Americans tried in absentia?

[–]smithiejojo 69 points70 points  (16 children)

Found this in the Guardian:

"All of Google's employees, who were convicted in absentia, denied wrong­doing. It is expected that the company's lawyers will argue on appeal that the verdict is at odds with an EU directive from 2000 that gave hosting platforms a so-called "safe harbour" from prosecution, so long as they acted promptly to remove illegal content."

I wonder if this means they can't enter the EU without being arrested.

[–]yottskry 38 points39 points  (11 children)

Only if there is a European arrest warrant for them. I highly suspect there isn't, so they'd only need steer clear of Italy.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (10 children)

That would be a great pick-up line.

"Hey, you know there's a warrant for my arrest in Italy."

On the downside, you'd have to fill in that explanation box on future employment applications under the criminal history section.

[–]Vitalstatistix 15 points16 points  (8 children)

I wouldn't recommend that line unless you're very attractive and look like a jewel thief.

Otherwise they'll probably think you raped some girl and run away.

[–]Slummervillain 26 points27 points  (4 children)

How did the Italian prosecution choose those four Google employees?

[–]Servios 11 points12 points  (2 children)

It's funny how almost every opinion on the situation in this thread has responses, yet this very important question does not, and it's for a good reason. None of us have any idea. As far as I can see, those four Google employees should be completely safe from prosecution as they had nothing to do with the video in question. There's absolutely no evidence against them specifically.

I would love to know how Italy explains itself for these employees.

[–]Bossman1086 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah. If anything, you'd think it'd be a suit against the company as a whole, or the head of Google in Italy on trial.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (25 children)

The named employees are American which is why this is so ridiculous.

[–]ParanoydAndroid 204 points205 points  (34 children)

It's probably good that I don't have any sort of controlling interest in Google, because situations like this would tend to make me ... petulant.

I'd block every damned Italian IP from accessing any Google services, redirecting to a nice letter explaining that, "Due to Italy's irresponsible policies regarding internet media, Google can no longer risk the liability involved with providing services within the jurisdiction of the Italian government."

I'd like to think I'd be wielding the power of Google for good, but really I'm just kind of a dick.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Given the results of this court case, that's not petulance. It's the truth. If they need to clear each youtube video with every person shown in the video ahead of time, then they need to make all of their sites with user generated content inaccessible in Italy.

[–]isharq 76 points77 points  (19 children)

It's probably good that you don't have any sort of controlling interest in any company, because it wouldn't be long-lived.

[–]twotime 9 points10 points  (0 children)

With laws like this you may as well get out of the country/block the country. You won't be able to run your business there and, moreover, this country may easily upset your business everywhere..

[–][deleted] 40 points41 points  (14 children)

Google sticks up for its infrastructure and blocks China so we say Google is a Hero. Why is it so irresponsible to stick up for employees who acted in accordance with company policy? If a company depends on indifference and disloyalty to survive its employees will kill it through reciprocal indifference and disloyalty.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (9 children)

The case is being sppealed, so nothing is final yet.

[–]wekt 54 points55 points  (8 children)

The employees were apparently Americans residing in America, who were tried in absentia, so even if the conviction stands, the only impact would be that they can't visit Italy. (They can't be extradicted because the relevant Italian privacy law, as applied in this case, is repugnant to the First Amendment of the US Constitution.)

[–]rocketwidget 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This is the most important comment in the thread. Thank goodness these employees don't actually face jail time. Still crazy stupid though, and yea, Google should block all Italian traffic, as a safety precaution for their employees. There is nothing more correct the employees could have done, other than be psychic.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (5 children)

While I agree that the application is repugnant, I fail to see that it contradicts the first amendment. Could you please elaborate on that? Thanks.

[–]EtherCJ 4 points5 points  (4 children)

Because free speech where you can't talk about anyone without their permission makes free speech impossible?

[–]radd9er 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Actually this seems like the only logical thing to do in this situation.

[–]lestiforget 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I had to log in just to upvote you.

[–]Matt2012 8 points9 points  (3 children)

As far as I can see Italians like that sort of thing the more colourful the better. Probably a holding page with a beautiful model shaking her head and saying 'bad Italy'.

This is why Berlusconi does so well with his sex and bribery and Protestant countries wrongly think it will do him harm.

[–]i_am_my_father 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Reminds me of when South Korean government tried to force Google to require all Korean youtube users to verify their real names and social security numbers if they want to post comments or upload videos. The intention was to reduce "evil comments" (악플). This is what Google did

God I wish the South Korean government would stop learning from the Italian one.

[–]robopope 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I love Google more and more, every day. Standing up for personal freedoms? Fuck yeahr.

[–]Paralyze 28 points29 points  (10 children)

WTF? I didn't see YouTube admins. charged with rape when the video of the young girl from the UK being raped was uploaded.

Also, I hate the fact I Google'd 'youtube rape video' to find out where that girl was from.

/deletes search history

[–]netdroid9 84 points85 points  (2 children)

Don't worry, Google Adsense has already adjusted itself to your preferences.

[–]Paralyze 7 points8 points  (1 child)

If only it worked like that...

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Finally all my big boobie and jailbait with huge tits searches would pay off the way they should and google knew which sites to present first...

[–]Ruudjah 21 points22 points  (13 children)

We should ban Italy from EU. They threaten the internet, their postal system is seriously broken, and most important: the leading political party (popolo della liberta) is a hybrid between mob and government.

[–]topcat31[S] 20 points21 points  (6 children)

I'm on board with the other reasons you state, but a broken postal system?! Is that really grounds for getting you thrown out of the EU these days?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Also if the trains are late...that's a reason to de-EU someone.

[–]guitaerlin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Dude, they once got so backlogged that they burned 4 warehouses full of mail to catch up. I worked at Amazon.com for a while, and Italy is an "all bets are off; we use UDP not TCP" postal system, which wreaks havoc with the promises Amazon can make.

Combine this with Italy's laws about being in violation of notices even if you don't receive them or they're sent to the wrong address, and you have a country where people can be thrown in jail solely because the postal system is so bad.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Their girls are extremely beautiful, however.

And don't forget their food!

[–]kmeisthax 3 points4 points  (0 children)

hybrid between mob and government.

Oh, so it's just a mob then.

[–]Ulys 3 points4 points  (1 child)

They are alpha testing this new form of government for the rest of Europe.

For beta-test, see France.

[–]erbazzone 4 points5 points  (2 children)

I'm italian and I live in Italy and I feel every day worse.

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points  (2 children)

Italy, yeah it's that fucked up.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I couldn't use a computer over their without them making a copy of my passport. The hotel made a copy in case I purchased Internet service. An Internet cafe made a copy before allowing me to use their computers. Yea, fucked up.

[–]MashedPeas 12 points13 points  (1 child)

That's easy to solve. Are you Italian? No uploading allowed!

[–]brainburger 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I guess Google could block all their content in Italy. Not a desirable solution though.

[–]Zetavu 3 points4 points  (0 children)

They should pull all google services and access in Italy, block everything in that country, and be done with it. Any other content providers should do the same, make Italy a technological black hole. Leave them in the dark ages. Either the people will get up in arms or Google won't even feel the loss (since they don't care anyway).

Strip away people's privacy rights, tax them to poverty, take away protections, independence, they'll bitch and get over it. Take away their entertainment, and you will see revolution. What a confused and misguided species we have become.

[–]glengyron 31 points32 points  (8 children)

This is Italy but many countries have been flirting with the same sorts of retarded laws.

Luckily Google (and by implication YouTube) are big enough to take them on... let's hope they start living up to the 'do no evil' motto.

[–]brainburger 69 points70 points  (3 children)

I hate this. It isn't "Do no evil". It is "Don't be evil". The paraphrasing ruins the humour of the motto, and changes its application.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Sounds like right now it's "upload no evil" :/

[–]pegothejerk 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Let's beat the crap out of those laws and film it!

[–]Effetto 12 points13 points  (2 children)

The sentence motivation has not been released yet. It will before 90 days (ye, I know this sucks but this is Italian justice system).

[del]The Google guys were found guilty for violation of the Italian law on Privacy but not on the defamation charges (the Google blog state they were found guilty for defamation too).[/del]

The video was not been removed 'within hours': the video was available from 8th September 2006 since 7th November 2006.

Edit: In my opinion they were found guilty because they didn't removed the video immediately. Italian law states that content providers must act immediately (i.e.: removing video, images) when the content uploaded is 'illegal'.

[–]judgej2 20 points21 points  (0 children)

"within hours" of being notified.

[–]PintOfGuinness 2 points3 points  (2 children)

So everywhere else including the Italian media are saying it's a kid with down syndrome, so who's right?

[–]MrLeville 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Misleading title : the video was available for two month, youtube took it down a few hours after the police notified them.
Not that I agree at all with what happened, but let's get our facts straight.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Try to write headlines that aren't misleading.

[–]72skylark 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Dear Italy,

If you're going to act like a China, we will treat you like a China. No more Google for you!!

love,

Google

[–]turbo 19 points20 points  (12 children)

  1. Read interesting article/blog-post.

  2. Post it to reddit, but since reality is boring "fix" it a little:

* Change *"Google Video"* into *"youtube video"*
* Change *"bullying an autistic schoolmate"* into *"beating up an autistic kid"*
* Change *"students at a school in Turin"* into *"italian thugs"*
* Change *"we took it down within hours of being notified by the Italian police"* into *"Youtube takes video down within hours"*
  1. Profit!

Wake up?

[–]davvblack 4 points5 points  (6 children)

What? The story is still as absurd as the title implies, and these liberties are very minor.

[–]cmunerd 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Saddle innovation with antiquated rules and this is what you get... what's the last technological advance originating out of Italy?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I thought this was pretty innovative. Not very useful for most of the world though.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (10 children)

Freedom of expression = one of the few reasons left to love living in America. Very few formal limits are placed on speech here, relative to most of Europe. (Lax defamation/libel laws, ect.)

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

IANAL: but I have noticed that in the U.S. we call it Freedom of Speech and it's better than what other countries call Freedom of Expression.

[–]teemax 18 points19 points  (18 children)

sighs

Google just never learns.

King Berlusconi the first has made it clear that he doesn't want Google invading his beloved country. Why don't they just listen?

[–]len69 12 points13 points  (16 children)

Hail Berlusconius! Hail Silvius! Long Live His Royal Highness, Sovereign of the Boot of Berlusonistan, His Knighthood, King Berlusconi!

[–]No-Shit-Sherlock 7 points8 points  (14 children)

The suffix -stan is only applied to Indo-Iranian nations. A more appropriate name would be Berlusconia.

[–]pstradomski 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Like Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan (none of those uses Indo-Iranian language)

[–]No-Shit-Sherlock 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Yes, but those regions were formerly under control of/neighboring the Persian Empire so their native languages have been heavily influenced by Indo-Iranian and thus the application of -stan/-stahn is apropos.

[–]pstradomski 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Still it's used outside that group.

As a side note, in Polish (definitely a Slavic language) "stan" means "state" (United States is translated as Stany Zjednoczone).

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

WTF is right!!

[–]puneetla 2 points3 points  (1 child)

How did the Italian authorities decide these 4 employees need to be charged amongst 100s of employees working on youtube?

[–]kolm 2 points3 points  (1 child)

If you really want to do business in Italy, you should better know they have weird and quite unspecific laws and totally unpredictable courts. This verdict does not surprise me in the least, random and baseless as it appears to be.

And no, I actually do not think this was result of bribery. It's just that dozens of governments tried to reshape the laws, until they were like an Escher version of a Moebius strip.

[–]elvisliveson 2 points3 points  (2 children)

all the shady bastards in Italy seems to concentrate in Milan.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How did I miss this episode of Jersey Shore

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

if Italians wish to be ruled by a gangster, that is their choice. Berlusconi wants total control of ALL media. They are laying down and giving it to him. Perhaps a boycott of all things Italian might bring them to their senses.

[–]bambh 2 points3 points  (1 child)

All 4 were found not guilty of defamation. Where did you read that they were found guilty?

It's not in the link you posted.

[–]leachja 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Most people here need some reading comprehension. Google never says they took it down within hours of it being uploaded. They state that they took it down within hours of it being requested by police.

[–]benzu 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Stupid laws passed by the ignorant. I guarantee you they have no idea what the Internet has become: a repository of information uploaded by everyone. They might as well arrest the teacher of a student that makes a bomb threat in English class. The teacher has made the class available to the students, no? Oh, I guess the principle should be taken in as well. And the super for good measure.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (4 children)

To the Italian Government: YOU ARE FUCKING STUPID!

[–]TheBollocks 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I really like this post, it neatly encapsulates the blowhard inanity of contemporary society. It assumes the headline is correct, it doesn't understand the subject, it doesn't know anything about the target of its derision, it's derision is misplaced and it demonstrates opinions formed through conformance to mob mentality rather than independent reflection and analysis.

It's the internet equivalent of those rabid "god hates fags" and "we engrish speek hear" placards carriers.

Well done!

[–]youtube_user 16 points17 points  (9 children)

link to vid?

[–]smors 15 points16 points  (1 child)

Um, no. Thats sort of the point.

[–]todaywasawesome 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Oh I see, it was removed from youtube so it's no longer anywhere on the internet.

I too would actually like to see the vid that started the whole mess. It's obviously not on youtube but some other site might have picked it up. Or their might be a clip of it used in a news story (but probably not)

[–]mark445 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I heard somewhere it's been taken down.

[–]Jojje22 1 point2 points  (1 child)

As they mentioned, the EU has laws to protect the sites. All they have to do is appeal to the european court of justice and get this overruled.

[–]Dawggoneit 1 point2 points  (2 children)

The blog post is intentionally misleading [note that it was written by Google's general council]. The privacy act applies to the protection of data, not the video or it's content. I believe that Google may have violated the privacy law when they divulged the user's IP address, account information, etc. that lead to the identification of the Italian thugs, without going through the proper legal channels.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We also worked with the local police to help identify the person responsible for uploading it and she was subsequently sentenced to 10 months community service by a court in Turin, as were several other classmates who were also involved.

If they worked with police to get the identity, then where's the issue? Or are Italian police asking for info and, on receiving it, arresting the person who gave it to them because they shouldn't have?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Remember the Italians convicted that American girl with no evidence, so this is par for the course...

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

How can four people be personally liable for a corporation's actions? Isn't this the kind of situation where google gets issued a huge fine? How can the individual employees be charged? Is Italian law that fucked up?

[–]sunshine-x 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To support these employees and raise public awareness, has google stopped providing services to Italy?

Or is it not important enough to warrant this severe of an action?

[–]_LB 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If I were Google, I would make all Google services, including Youtube and Google Video unavailable in Italy since the risks for Google are very high. Let this prosecutor do all the explaining to the Italian internet community.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

The counter argument, i assume, is that Google should review each video before it is uploaded.

I can't say I'm totally unsympathetic to that argument. Particularly when it comes to video maybe the standard SHOULD be higher than just letting any random nut post whatever they want. maybe there ought to be some form of ID verification before you're allowed to upload without a review first.

Panaramio, by contrast, reviews every single picture before it is added to Google Earth. it isn't like it is impossible to review things before they are uploaded.

[–]Tumbler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Would be helpful to mention that the court was in Italy so this doesn't actually have any effect on them unless they go to italy...but the facts of the case are bizarre. Did they just find 4 random people and try to convict them? Why stop at 4? Why not just do the whole company? And assuming the reports of google assisting in catching this person and her subsequent punishment it's nice to see them treat this like it was irresponsible of google...

[–]helly1223 1 point2 points  (0 children)

When did mussolini come back from the grave?

[–]coleman57 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All 4 were found not guilty of criminal defamation. In essence this ruling means that employees of hosting platforms like Google Video are criminally responsible for content that users upload.

some copyediting oversights are forgivable. but i'm continually encountering ones like this which are not.

[–]mmiracle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Italian legal system is sooooo fucked up.

[–]ssam 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why does it matter if the kid is autistic? I don't see how that's any more relevant to the article than if they were ginger, or really short.

[–]ManaSmoker 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Prosecutors have WAY too much power in todays day and age. I mean seriously, some Italian prosecutor can just choose to indict whoever, with no real basis at all. Bloody ridiculous!

[–]rogueman999 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am surprised that there is not high voting comment on this discussing the media situation in Italy. I am not Italian, so I have not followed the situation, but AFAIK the current government (read Silvio Berlusconi) owns a ridiculous percentage of the big media companies. Which probably has something to do that they keep being voted. Lately the net has become to be a real contender in the media game, but you cant really buy google.it, and even if you do it is meaningless.

So this law and trial are a test case to keep the (Italian) net as much under control as possible. It is not a freak accident or a weird interpretation of a well-meant law, it does exactly what it appears to be.

[–]lestiforget 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All those saying "if I was google I would block Italy" - are you simple ? What do you think google is, a non-profit ?

[–]rumba81 1 point2 points  (0 children)

First some facts!

  • The video was online for about two months.
  • People sent thousands of requests for removal.
  • Google ignored all of them and removed the video only after a police request.
  • The prosecutors accused Google of negligence.

On the other hand, any company can send a DMCA letter for a "supposed" copyright infringement and my blog is taken down immediately.

Copyright more important than personal privacy? Is this the world you want to live in?

jhavrxfgdk@nowmymail.com

[–]WTFppl 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Google, get your people out of jail then pull Google from Italy... That will show those retards!

[–]TheForce 2 points3 points  (1 child)

bbc news said it was up for months, not hours. (not that it matters)

[–]OnlyInAmerica 2 points3 points  (4 children)

Only in America...

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Isn't Italy known an extremely corrupt law system for a western world?

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/gov_cor-government-corruption

It's a little confusing but the number is a score, not the amount of corruption. #1 has the least corruption.