Four Google Officials Facing Charges In Italy For Errant Video 153
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."
Prosecutors in Italy are stupid... (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
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.
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
Re:Long Italian tradition of standing up for the w (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:Drummond has never lived in the country... (Score:1, Interesting)
You know, I expected to find something in that story that I could use to refute the validity of your claim. Perhaps that the law he had violated was particularly severe, or something we could all agree on. But nope, that was a pretty good example of things we will have to deal with increasingly in this world. It is like being at the border of one country and saying something loud enough that someone in a neighboring country overhears (which is illegal to say in that country) and being arrested for it in your country (where it may or may not even be illegal) and then forced to answer for it in a foreign land (and then ending up in that land's jail system). This is a slippery slope if I ever saw one. What foreign laws are we going to have our people subjected to while in this country? To me the answer must be "none". And in that case how is it reasonable to expect the reverse. If someone here does something that is illegal here in another land (for example, hiring someone to kill someone else) then they should be charged and prosecuted here, since we can't trust a foreign court system. And while they may not trust ours, it is our citizen we are talking about. I feel every government should take this same stance. Else, what good is a government?
Re:Itally Not Prudent (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'.
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.