Slashdot Log In
Four Google Officials Facing Charges In Italy For Errant Video
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Fri Nov 07, 2008 04:28 PM
from the looks-like-digging-for-deep-pockets-to-me dept.
from the looks-like-digging-for-deep-pockets-to-me dept.
mikesd81 writes to tell us that four Google employees may be facing charges of defamation and failure to control personal data simply because they didn't remove a video of a boy with Down's Syndrome being harassed and eventually hit over the head with a box of tissue, from Google Video. The video was posted in September of 2006 and was removed by Google within a day of receiving the initial complaints, but apparently that isn't fast enough. "Google maintains charges against the employees are unwarranted, Pancini said. Europe's E-commerce Directive exempts service providers from prescreening content before it is publicly posted, he said. Also, the video was technically uploaded to a Google server in the US, not in Italy, Pancini said. 'It was a terrible video,' Pancini said, adding that Google is concerned about the case's impact on censorship on the Internet. The defendants include David C. Drummond, a Google senior vice president, corporate development and chief legal officer. Pancini said Drummond did paperwork to create Google Italy, but has never lived in the country."
Related Stories
[+]
Rapidshare Ordered To Filter Content 161 comments
A Cow writes "TorrentFreak reports that the Regional Court in Hamburg, Germany, has ruled that file-hosting service Rapidshare must proactively filter certain content. Music industry outfit GEMA asked the court to ban Rapidshare from making 5,000 tracks from its catalogue available on the Internet."
Reader biabia brings an update to a related case in Italy involving four Google executives. The issue in that situation revolves around Google's response time in taking down a video that was deemed to be a privacy violation. Google is worried that a verdict against them could lead to mandatory pre-screening of all public videos that are uploaded onto their websites. Those proceedings have now been postponed until late September.
Update: 6/24 at 17:45 GMT by SS: The article originally reported that Rapidshare was fined $34 million. No such fine has been imposed — $34 million was the estimated value of the tracks hosted on Rapidshare.
Update: 6/24 at 17:45 GMT by SS: The article originally reported that Rapidshare was fined $34 million. No such fine has been imposed — $34 million was the estimated value of the tracks hosted on Rapidshare.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Long Italian tradition of standing up for the weak (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Long Italian tradition of standing up for the w (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
(treading carefully not to invoke Godwin's Law)
Maybe they are trying to distance themselves from past mistakes and be better as the Germans have done.
Re:Long Italian tradition of standing up for the w (Score:5, Funny)
Now that's funny - why'd you go and post as AC?
Sorry i was in a hurry and i wasn't logged in...
Just kidding, i didn't post that. Hah. Or did i? Really i just wanted to ensure that if someone stepped up to the plate after this, it would be sufficiently confusing that one could never know if they were really the OP! Hah! Oh god, i need a life...
-Taylor
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I agree with you, and think that certain regulation should be implemented that mimics certain countries laws. That would be the person who shot the video, no the person who is hosting the server that let someone post the video. I am not sure(as I never read the articles) but if the person is guilty of not screening, then I don't think there should be punishment, but if there is a way to track the person who filmed the video and posted it...they are the ones who should get charged.
Re:Long Italian tradition of standing up for the w (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree with you, and think that certain regulation should be implemented that mimics certain countries laws. That would be the person who shot the video, no the person who is hosting the server that let someone post the video. I am not sure(as I never read the articles) but if the person is guilty of not screening, then I don't think there should be punishment, but if there is a way to track the person who filmed the video and posted it...they are the ones who should get charged.
Charged with what? Putting a distasteful video on the internet? Do you know what kind of precedent that would set? Not that the current situation (suing google) is any better...
-Taylor
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or for assaulting a kid with Down syndrome...
Re: (Score:2)
Google has more money than the bullies parents.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
And probably Italy, too.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Do you know what kind of precedent that would set?
None, as the Italian law system is not based in common law and therefore does not have the notion of precedent
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know what kind of precedent that would set?
None, as the Italian law system is not based in common law and therefore does not have the notion of precedent
Ah, well then, interesting.
-Taylor
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
maybe not a legal precedent in the traditional sense, but just because there's no common law doesn't mean people won't imitate these actions and file similar cases after seeing the successful prosecution of the defendants in this case. heck, other European, and even non-European, countries could see it as an affirmation of "societally acceptable" censorship.
it's just like when the U.K. starts putting up surveillance cameras everywhere it, not only sets a bad example, but also makes it more permissible for,
no boarders (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:no boarders (Score:5, Funny)
No, wait, never mind. That's hell I'm talking about.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
You mean that razor wire is imaginary? It looks so real!
Re:no boarders (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:no boarders (Score:5, Funny)
Somewhere in hell, in some dark corner of a particularly nasty pit, there is a small chair with your UID carved on it. Freaks.
Parent
Italy, eh? (Score:4, Funny)
That's a bit machiavellian of them.
corporations (Score:5, Insightful)
How on earth are they suing individuals? Google is a corporation and must be treated as such under the law.
Re:corporations (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:corporations (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:corporations (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not that some don't want to, it's that they can't afford to.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Pity, Italy's pretty cool. Of course, the average American never leaves the state they were born in let alone the country. It must be nice to live in an area so fucking awesome that you never want to leave it.
Awesome ... possibly, depending upon where you live. Big, definitely. And why would you assume nobody ever wants to leave it? Everyone here looks with envy upon those who are able to visit other countries, either for business or pleasure. I know it's popular to look upon Americans as ignorant boobs who think we're the center of the Universe (and, okay, looking at our President for the past eight years I guess I can see why) but really that's an unfair characterization.
Besides, look at the size of a typic
Re: (Score:2)
Judicial processing of violations of criminal law are (usually?) targeted at individuals. For example, you can't just murder someone and then claim that as an employee of a corporation you have some kind of legal immunity. Obviously it all depends on the law and judicial authority in question.
Re:corporations (Score:5, Insightful)
As an Italian living in Italy I remember that the boys that were responsible for the harassment were prosecuted in 2006, at the time of the facts.
Google has been accused of abuses related to the failure of preventing defamation and to having made a profit out of that video thanks to the ads on the page (this is an abuse because our privacy laws). Those are criminal charges that can result in both a fine and jail time. Under Italian law individuals have criminal responsibility and not companies. That's why the state is suing managers of Google and not the company.
My take on this issue is that's impractical to scan and review every single video, picture or comment posted to the internet (Google Video, YouTube, Flickr, even Slashdot). It's just a matter of volume. Laws that were created with the press or the TV in mind should be rewritten to take in account that fact unless we want to shutdown the Internet in Italy.
I'm sure that in every country there are forces that want to tighten the control on the Internet and the freedom of speech of individuals, but I'm also sure that in most countries the majority of the citizens don't support them. Criminal responsibility is individual and only posters should be sued when controls on content are impractical. The service provider should be exempted from any accusations of complicity.
Parent
Itally Not Prudent (Score:5, Insightful)
If this proceeds, Google should simply shut down its operations in Italy and move to a neighboring country where its employees won't be targeted by tyrants.
I'm assuming Italy doesn't want that reputation.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not an expert on international law, but if the employees aren't in Italy then why should they worry? I doubt a US court would allow an extradition for a crime as meaningless like this.
Also is there a mirror of this video? I want to see it since some employees could be getting into some trouble because of it!
Re:Itally Not Prudent (Score:4, Insightful)
You don't want a warrant for your arrest in any country. Even if it is something stupid which you can't be extradited for. It means you can never visit and you can never get a flight which goes through their airport or even anywhere near the country (for fear of being diverted to the country for some reason).
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
well, because they'd be at risk throughout Europe if a European arrest warrant was issued for them. And it seems that local governments don't have the right to tell issuing countries to get bent when they recieve a warrant for a petty or out-of-jurisdiction 'offence'.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
.
and where, pray tell, in the EU is Google going to find a more tolerant reception when it comes to stories like this?
Re:Itally Not Prudent (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Prosecutors in Italy are stupid... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Prosecutors in Italy are stupid... (Score:5, Funny)
Well, thank god that never happens in the USA!
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Never has the world had more need for a B-Ark [wikipedia.org].
Just so you know, I've already reserved a place for all the British MPs that think a surveillance state is a good idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, that probably means they're just going to be your average run-of-the-mill amount of "ignorant". Ignore Italy, they're special...
Re: (Score:2)
Please mod the parent up.
These kind of dumb warrants against foreigners by prosecutors/judges in Italy are very common. There are warrants in Italy against President George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld, for example.
In case you never saw a mafioso... (Score:5, Interesting)
That was a comment that reeks Mafia all the way. Sure, some prosecutors are silly like there are silly people everywhere, but this kind of generalisation is typical of corrupt politicians who accuse prosecutors going after them of being politically motivated, as appearing in the press were the main aspiration of prosecutors (in case you did not know: we do not elect prosecutors nor judges here, so being known among the populace is no career advantage). There is much more money and career to be made by keeping quiet and pandering to illegal interests, as Corrado Carnevale [wikipedia.org] exemplifies.
As for the specific case, I'd like to point out that in the Italian system felonies, once reported, must always be investigated and prosecuted, no matter the opinion of the prosecutor; it is a way of reducing arbitrary decisions and IMHO it is overall a Good Thing. As the article says, the decision to hold trial has not been made yet, and the chance that the prosecutor will ask for an archiving is not as small as you Americans may think; since all reported felonies must be investigated, dropping one is not a mark of incompetence on someone's career.
If I remember correctly, in this specific instance it was former justice minister Clemente Mastella [wikipedia.org], leader of a corruption-ridden micro-party and currently in political disgrace (the two things are unfortunately unrelated...) that was most vocal in calling for a ban on Youtube and Google video when the video surfaced, of course never suggesting that the people who uploaded the video and performed the assault should be investigated themselves.
In fact, I have no idea about what happened to the perpetrators. Surely I did not read nor hear anything on Italian media. It seems that all the fuss was about the thing being recorded and broadcast, instead of the crime itself.
Parent
Related US Law (Score:4, Insightful)
It seems to be appropriate, but does anyone have personal experience?
At least they know their priorities (Score:4, Insightful)
Predictably, it doesn't state anywhere that Italian prosecutors are going after the boys who harassed and attacked a handicapped child.
Re:At least they know their priorities (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Why go after Google? (Score:3, Interesting)
So let me get this straight, four kids were bullying a child with Down's Syndrome and a video of it was posted on Google Video. Rather than speaking with the parents of the children about bullying someone, especially someone with Down's Syndrome, prosecutors in Italy decide to go after Google? I don't think the teens involved should be going to jail and certainly Italian taxpayer time and money should not be directed completely on this. But I don't see how or why they are trying to go after Google, especially since they complied with the removal request within a day.
Also, for those of you wondering who Pancini is and didn't read the article, he is introduced in the article as Marco Pancini, Google's European public policy counsel. The summary does not mention who the hell he is.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why go after Google? (Score:5, Informative)
Prosecutors do not decide what to prosecute in Italy. Felonies, when reported, must always be investigated. In this case, it was the ministry of Interior that sent in a complaint, and prosecutors are only doing their job. Should they decide to start a trial instead of archiving the case, then there will be a reason to insult them.
Parent
Drummond has never lived in the country... (Score:3, Interesting)
What, you mean you can be sentenced to several years in jail in a nation that you're never even visited? [govtech.com] Imagine the shock.
I wonder if we'll ever see an American extradited to Europe, Australia, or even China for breaking intellectual property laws. The US is currently lobbying for criminal law to be used to enforce patents in the EU - it would be amusing to see the response if Europe actually started requesting the extradition of Americans who are suspected of violating EU patents!
In other news, treaties that are only enforced by one side suck.
Yet another example of misplaced anger... (Score:3, Insightful)
Why sue Youtube?
There are the harassers and the video posters who are more directly linked with any harm.
Oh, right. The money.
Why Not Just Ignore Italy? (Score:2)
Re:Anyone else getting sick and tired of "advocacy (Score:5, Funny)
Why don't you found a 501(c)(3) corporation to work for the banning of such groups?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Why don't you found a 501(c)(3) corporation to work for the banning of such groups?
Nah. Too much work.