Criminal Complaint Filed Against Facebook After Girl's Death 559
An anonymous reader writes "A prosecutor has opened an investigation into how Facebook allowed the publication of insults and bullying posts aimed at 14-year-old Carolina Picchio, who took her own life after a gang of boys circulated a video on Facebook of her appearing drunk and disheveled in a bathroom at a party. The Italian Parents Association has filed a criminal complaint against Facebook for allegedly having a role in the instigation of Carolina's suicide. 'This is the first time a parents' group has filed such a complaint against Facebook in Europe,' said Antonio Affinita, the director. 'Italian law forbids minors under 18 signing contracts, yet Facebook is effectively entering into a contract with minors regarding their privacy, without their parents knowing.''
Should face be moderator of all posts? (Score:2)
Stop with the messenger shooting! (Score:5, Funny)
Sue the fuckwads who kept posting these videos if you're going to sue anyone.
If you're going to sue Facebook, you might as well sue Al Gore for inventing the Internet.
Italians (Score:5, Insightful)
This from the same country that sued scientists for predicting earthquakes (or not predicting them good enough).
If the parents don't know about the "contract" that their children "sign" and this is a problem, then maybe the parents should be sued?
Re:Italians (Score:5, Insightful)
Parents regardless. The girl was 14 and drunk at a party...
Good parenting there, folks. Yeah...Facebook failed the girl...not you, right?
Re: (Score:3)
The girl obviously had self esteem issues from before the drunken stupor, and posting the videos only made those problems worse. Yeah, I would blame the parents first, not that blame means anything. Chances are, she is from a single mother family OR her daddy did things to her no dad would ever do. But we shouldn't say anything about the parents because ... well that would be "mean" :/
Re: (Score:3)
I think at 14 the girl shares some responsibility. I know it sounds harsh and Im sorry that she felt the need to take her life, but when you get drunk in public people will see it, and theres a good chance someone will video it. While certainly bullying behavior should be dealt with, the ultimate solution isnt to pretend that getting drunk at a party will have 0 consequences.
National ID Requirement For Registration (Score:5, Interesting)
If that's how Italy wants to play the game, then Facebook should just require that all Italian nationals provide government identification in order to use Facebook. Then they can validate the user's age and ensure that their "contract" is legal.
Stupid and silly, you say? I agree, but how else is Facebook - or any other website - going to ensure that they're able to operate in Italy?
Yes, this may mean that many business simply won't be able to do business in Italy. Oh well. Italy can suffer for its own stupidity I suppose.
Re:National ID Requirement For Registration (Score:5, Informative)
If for instance someone ELSE uses your email for facebook, and you want to report that to facebook, they demand government ID and the like faxed to them to prove you're you (though how that's relevant to being the owner of the email I will never guess). Also, some korean mmos I've played required you to use your korean social security number to make an account: even locking your gender to your real gender.
It's been done/required.
too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
that all the kids didnt have pocket sized HD video cameras when I was in school - the shit that went on would have been embarrassing for anyone reliving it later...but now, kids cant make mistakes and learn from them without being taunted fr life with the stupid mistake...
Of corse binge drinking and other crazy stuff that hapens at partys is wrong - hense the term mistake...Mistakes should be learning experiences, not stains that follow you around for life...
How can kids be kids with cameras everywhere?
Facebook isnt guilty here, just like guns don't kill people, its the kids that posted that shit that are to blame here...
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
kids didnt have pocket sized HD video cameras when I was in school....but now, kids cant make mistakes and learn from them without being taunted fr life with the stupid mistake...
I don't know about that. In my experience kids have never required video evidence of a mistake being made before they're willing to taunt someone for life for making it. I'm sure that having embarrassing videos floating around doesn't improve the situation at all, but stuff like this happened long before cell phone cameras were prevalent. Blaming cell phones, or Facebook for that matter, is just an excuse to ignore the underlying systemic problem.
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
In the past, only the people present at the time of the incident know the facts, and all others had to go on was their say so. This allowed the relative importance of incidents to fade with time. With video footage of everything that proof persists indefinitely, and can be used to judge indefinitely.
Re: (Score:3)
It's matter of degree. I suspect that having video as evidence and as a reminder tesnd to keep the hurt alive longer than before.
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
What you're describing isn't a 'systemic' problem...it's a HUMAN problem.
Essentially: People are dicks.
Kids are especially dicks, before they (hopefully) start to internalize the social-conduct rules that allow us to live in societies.
No matter how many wellness-meetings we hold, empowerment seminars we attend, etc. it won't matter. The fact is that humans are animals and there's ontological developmental stage where 'little animal humans' (hopefully) learn not to bite, hit, or poop on the floor. Shortly thereafter, there's an intellectual/social phase where we (hopefully, again) learn treat each other with a minimum of empathy and respect, usually through being treated like shit ourselves.
It's rough, and frankly, not all survive. Until we physiologically evolve to being sensitive humans coming out of the womb, it's not going to change. And as far as I've noticed, seclusion (ie home schooling during those formative years) simply stunts that development-track in one way or another.
Re: (Score:3)
kids didnt have pocket sized HD video cameras when I was in school....but now, kids cant make mistakes and learn from them without being taunted fr life with the stupid mistake...
I don't know about that. In my experience kids have never required video evidence of a mistake being made before they're willing to taunt someone for life for making it. I'm sure that having embarrassing videos floating around doesn't improve the situation at all, but stuff like this happened long before cell phone cameras were prevalent. Blaming cell phones, or Facebook for that matter, is just an excuse to ignore the underlying systemic problem.
The underlying systemic problem being what? That kids will be kids?
Kids do stupid shit - it's in the nature of being young.
The nature of Facebook is that stupid shit becomes public and permanent so what would have been relatively minor before Facebook takes on epic proportions now.
Facebook has broken the law and should be held accountable. I'm not saying the're directly responsible for the girls death but they certainly contributed to it by allowing minors to have accounts (and thus contracts) with them.
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
I was not puking up drunk when I was 14. Neither were the other kids I hung out with. I don't consider that kind of behavior "kids be[ing] kids". At all.
However, I think this is more the fault of the parents than facebook. Facebook was not the negligent party that let that child get that drunk to begin with. You can yell all you want about kids sneaking around and getting away with stuff, but it's the parents' responsibility to mind the child nonetheless.
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm pretty sure others have had similar experiences which turned out to be to their benefit since they enabled them to learn that acting stupid has a nasty price a lot of the time. I've no comments about the second part of your argument though.
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
I was not puking up drunk when I was 14. Neither were the other kids I hung out with. I don't consider that kind of behavior "kids be[ing] kids". At all.
My, aren't we squeaky clean. Puking up drunk at 14, or any age, is not something to be encouraged, but it's a lot more forgivable than bullying or harassment.
Facebook was not the negligent party that let that child get that drunk to begin with. You can yell all you want about kids sneaking around and getting away with stuff, but it's the parents' responsibility to mind the child nonetheless.
This is a minor variant on "blame the victim": you're blaming the victim's parents. What about the parents of the scumbags that posted the video?
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:4, Insightful)
Right, like victims never have shares in their own plight? Was she bullied? yes. Did she choose to kill herself? yes. Did the bullies kill her? no. Did facebook kill her? no. Who is responsible for her death? she is. Each side made choices along the way. Saying things that happen to make someone kill themselves is not the same thing as murdering them yourself.
blame the bullies' parents! blame their grandparents! blame zuckerberg!! I tire of this blame chain culture. Soon it'll be too risky to do much of anything in life, but of course, the politicians tell us that the top priority for western culture is to make the soccer moms feel that their kids are safe.
Bottom line: people do stupid shit. No amount of law or police state enforcement will change this. We should be teaching kids the tough realities of life instead of coddling their feelings. It prevents extreme reactions (like suicide or mass murder) to social stressors.
Re: (Score:3)
She was 14. At that age children are not responsible adults, they can't be held entirely accountable for their actions or even judge the potential consequences properly.
I also take issue with your claim that she chose to kill herself. Very few people make a rational, concious decision to commit suicide.
Re: (Score:3)
Indirectly yes. You don't have to stab somebody or shoot them to kill them. Psychological harm can be just as effective.
If you accept that kind of indirect blame, then right now you're murdering a starving African child.
The only real choices made here were (a) to film this unfortunate girl in a compromising position and (b) to post it on Facebook for the world to see. Everything else was a consequence.
What about the choice to go to the party, and the choice to start drinking and maybe doing drugs, and the choice to keep drinking until she got drunk? Those choices were even more fundamental than the ones you listed.
Like I said you don't always have to physically commit murder. Often inflicting psychological damage can do the job just as well.
Out of 1000 murders, how many do you think have no physical interaction, just psychological damage?
Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to know. (Score:5, Insightful)
The Italian Parents Association has filed a criminal complaint against Facebook for allegedly having a role in the instigation of Carolina's suicide. ... 'Italian law forbids minors under 18 signing contracts...'
The biggest lie on the internet is the answer to the question "Are you 18 or older?"
Big deal. Almost every country is the same way. Only a parent's group would be as naive is to attempt this. And only a parent's group would try to shirk responsibility for parenting -- which is what this is really about. Look, if you can't educate your crotch fruit on how to safely use a computer, don't let them use one. Stop asking the damn government to do your job -- in the 50s, we could buy little Jimmy a chemistry kit that included Arsenic in it, or a glass blowing kit that was identical in every way to the tools used by adults, except they were made for children's hands.
In most societies that haven't yet gone full retard thanks to people propping children up as a shield for their own political gain, children start doing adult work as soon as they are physically and mentally capable. Run around in Africa and you'll see 7 year olds tending crops and making dinner. Meanwhile, in the United States, god help you if you forget to include the fork with your teenager's meal... they'll just stare blankly at it, or even complain.
I guess what I'm saying is: It's your parenting that's at fault, not the internet. No, really, it is, and I don't care what bullshit legal argument you care to make. If you have a crappy kid, it's very like to be a sign that you're a crappy parent. Deal with it, and stop ruining everyone else's lives with goverment regulation because you decided to breed but lacked the mental capacity to do any of the work that comes after your 15 seconds of joy.
Re: (Score:3)
Don't be so coy, tell us how you really feel.
If this was your kid and she got bullied so bad she killed herself what would you do? I know I wouldn't be fucking around with lawyers and a lawsuit. I'd have to have some personal satisfaction of some good old fashion revenge.
Re:Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to kn (Score:5, Interesting)
If this was your kid and she got bullied so bad she killed herself what would you do?
Firstly, I would have had my kid involved in extracurricular activities, had them assisting in chores and other things, and developed in them a sense of self-reliance and independence. A child that can do things for herself is not a child that can readily have their self-esteem destroyed by a bully. Such self-reliance would include self-defense classes; No girl should fear that a boy will assault her. Secondly, I'd track down the parents of the child bullying and explain the situation to them verbally and in person. If the parents didn't step up to the plate, I would explain to them in a non-verbal way my disappointment in their lack of parenting.
But the one thing I wouldn't do is go off whining to the government or some parenting group about how my child was being bullied and, so enmeshed in my own ineptitude as a parent, allow the situation to worsen to the point my child committed suicide. I mean, really, as a parent how can you not see your child is struggling? You do whatever it takes to protect your family; You, not the government, you. It's called taking responsibility for the situation, and I would parent my child by example by showing that same self-reliant quality in my own involvement in the situation.
But I would not engage in 'revenge'. That is the refuge of a coward; If I'm angry enough to fight someone, they're going to be facing me and they're going to be armed. And then they're going to lose.
Re:Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to kn (Score:5, Insightful)
Firstly, I would have had my kid involved in extracurricular activities, had them assisting in chores and other things, and developed in them a sense of self-reliance and independence. A child that can do things for herself is not a child that can readily have their self-esteem destroyed by a bully.
Of course no child ever raised in such a manner by a self-righteous parent has ever been messed up, at least at some point in their life.
BTW, why do you write "I would have had my kid involved in extracurricular activities" and "I would parent my child" instead of "I did have had my kid involved in extracurricular activities" and "I did parent my child"? You have raised at least one child at least through their teens, right?
If the parents didn't step up to the plate, I would explain to them in a non-verbal way my disappointment in their lack of parenting.
Oh my, aren't we a tough character.
If I'm angry enough to fight someone, they're going to be facing me and they're going to be armed.
Armed? You mean like a duel in a Western? My favorites star Gary Cooper.
If it gets to the point of armed, I say screw the "fair fight" nonsense and just treat it like a war. The only object is to win. Of course I'm obviously not the sort of heroic character you are.
Re:Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to kn (Score:4)
To answer that question
But you didn't answer that simple straightforward and completely reasonable question. You evaded it. Anybody who had raised at least one kid through their teen years, especially someone as self-righteous as you, would say "yes I have" and "yes I did raise my kid that way and they turned out great because of it". Ergo you haven't, and ergo your comments are a bombastic joke.
Re:Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to kn (Score:5, Insightful)
But you didn't answer that simple straightforward and completely reasonable question. You evaded it. Anybody who had raised at least one kid through their teen years, especially someone as self-righteous as you, would say "yes I have" and "yes I did raise my kid that way and they turned out great because of it". Ergo you haven't, and ergo your comments are a bombastic joke.
You're attacking the messenger, not the message. Whether or not I'm a parent has absolutely dick to do with whether or not my statements are correct. You may think it matters. Many people think it matters. But it doesn't; The truth is the truth, irrespective of who says it. And that, sir, is why the ad hominem is a logical fallacy, and why I didn't see a need to dignify yours with a direct response so you could sound your trumpet and say "See! See! This one isn't a parent yet, so we can safely ignore everything she said!"
You haven't attacked a single point I've made, nor even disagreed with it. All you're doing is hand waves and personal attacks... and the fact that even one person modded you up suggests that critical thinking skills here on Slashdot continue to fall precipitously and are being rapidly supplanted by feel-good but empty irrational discourse.
Speaking of critical thinking skills; here's some extra support for what I've been saying (and you haven't);
Zero tolerance policies are ineffective, most bullying isn't online but in real life, and bullying online often follows from the same, that the primary risk factor for bullying is being socially marginalized, and the correlation between bullying and suicide is tenuous at best. Source [csmonitor.com]
Zero tolerance policies were demanded by parents who wanted to address the symptom (bullying), not the problem (their child). Bullying can be greatly managed by teach the child to defend his/herself, something that teachers, administrators, and legislators are loathe to admit, but every psychologist will tell you is important. Confronting your attacker is therapudic, even after the fact -- it's where the phrase "getting your day in court" comes from. Anti-bullying strategies must be taught by the parents; For both political and social reasons, it cannot be done by the government. As far as being socially marginalized; While a parent cannot entirely prevent this, they can lend emotional support. As any member of the LGBT community will tell you, parental support makes dealing with coming out and social marginalization, isolation, etc., a great deal easier. Every advocacy group, every psychologist, every support group will tell you this. Parental involvement is the salve to the wound of bullying, not government intervention. It's supported in study after study that parental involvement and influence has an enormous bearing on a child's emotional and mental state. And speaking of that, the lack of correlation between suicide and bullying? That points to these teens already having significant mental illness. Well, where were the parents? It's not like depression isn't treatable.
Re: (Score:3)
You should read some books on child psychology, you will get a bit of a shock.
Re: (Score:3)
I did plenty of chores and sport and it never solved any bullying problems for me.
You're alive to post about it, so perhaps it solved the "I got bullied so I must kill myself" problem.
Re: (Score:3)
> If this was your kid and she got bullied so bad she killed herself what would you do?
If I were try to place blame with ANYONE outside of the immediate family, then it would be with the actual "bullies". These are the people engaging in any actual "harassment". Facebook is just a tool. It is a dumb machine that does whatever it's users tell it to do.
You can't really micromanage it without destroying it or much of the rest of the Internet with it.
This isn't just about Facebook but about ANY user created
Re: (Score:3)
If this was your kid and she got bullied so bad she killed herself what would you do?
I might turn myself into the authorities for negligent homicide on the grounds that I raised my child so badly that they killed themselves over what are quite clearly self-esteem issues.
Re: (Score:3)
I might turn myself into the authorities for negligent homicide on the grounds that I raised my child so badly that they killed themselves over what are quite clearly self-esteem issues.
Another one. You have raised at least one child through their teen years, right?
Re: (Score:3)
Another one. You have raised at least one child through their teen years, right?
I take it from your comment that you have. What, apart from your ego makes you believe that you did a remotely good job of it?
Merely having done something once does not act as any guarantee that you (a) did a good job of it or (b) are now an expert in it.
Nevertheless I have not encountered a group so self-righteous as other parents.
Re:Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to kn (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess what I'm saying is: It's your parenting that's at fault, not the internet. No, really, it is, and I don't care what bullshit legal argument you care to make. If you have a crappy kid, it's very like to be a sign that you're a crappy parent. Deal with it, and stop ruining everyone else's lives with goverment regulation because you decided to breed but lacked the mental capacity to do any of the work that comes after your 15 seconds of joy.
What a terribly shallow view to have.
Day of scheduled suicide: February 8th 2013, my birthday [nydailynews.com]
Brocklebank said Noah's school gave her a bullying incident form to fill out, organized meetings between her son and his bullies, and asked the boys that were picking on him to sign contracts pledging to stop.
Still, she said, the harassment continued and she wanted authorities to do more. For example, Brocklebank said, Noah sat alone in the cafeteria for two months and often skipped lunch.
The situation came to a head when Noah, who only recently received his parents' permission to open an Instagram account, uploaded the pictures showing tiny cuts on his arm and a caption with his suicide threat on Jan. 26. He blocked his mother from seeing the post.
While her son was in the hospital on a psych hold,
she had this website created for him: http://lettersfornoah.com/about-noah.html [lettersfornoah.com]
I realize you're still a girl in training, but sooner or later you're going to have to learn that the world isn't so nearly as black and white as you've made it out to be.
Or maybe you'll write a letter to Noah and explain to him that his depression and isolation is all his parents' fault.
Your choice.
Re:Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to kn (Score:4, Insightful)
What a terribly shallow view to have.
Day of scheduled suicide: February 8th 2013, my birthday
Yes, let's just throw in some emotions to obfusciate the real question: Is filing a criminal complaint against Facebook the right reaction? The parents claim it is because they failed to prevent "cyberbullying". Unfortunately, there is absolutely no evidence [csmonitor.com] to support a link between suicide and bullying. As it so happens, suicide is the result of mental illness, and the DSM-V doesn't have anything listed for "recipient of mean words". Because it's a mental illness that's the cause here, specifically untreated depression, I'm going to have to turn that finger right back around at the parents. Well, what did you do when you noticed your daughter was depressed?
While her son was in the hospital on a psych hold,
she had this website created for him: http://lettersfornoah.com/about-noah.html [lettersfornoah.com]
Awwww, a completely unrelated but tragic tale to distract us from objectively thinking about this and instead give in to irrational emotional impulses. I'll stick with the scientific method, kthxbai.
I realize you're still a girl in training, but sooner or later you're going to have to learn that the world isn't so nearly as black and white as you've made it out to be.
An ad hominem attack. Stay classy, 'Tubesteak'. (-_-) With a nickname like that, you're hardly one to diss someone else's choice.
Or maybe you'll write a letter to Noah and explain to him that his depression and isolation is all his parents' fault.
To a significant degree... it is. [umm.edu] It has a strong genetic correlation; it runs in families. But let's ignore the science for a minute, that seems to be more in character with the NuSlash(tm) residents like yourself that have been filling this place up since it sold out to Dice...
Re: (Score:3)
DSM-V doesn't have anything listed for "recipient of mean words"
That's quite surprising, considering the amount of fluff included in the latest version. Don't worry though, chances of something like that being included in a future revision are quite high. (snark is good against depression - see what i did here? regardless, please do keep in mind that it's not polite to bring DSM-V into a serious conversation. if it really must be done, use an earlier version)
It's not easy. Nothing in life ever is. But it's worth it... and you have something I didn't -- a mother that cares. Lean on her until you can stand up straight again. [*] You're a survivor. You can do this.
(* Skipping irrelevant bits)
Hmm. I would be quite tempted to hit you with some more snark for this part, but that
Re: (Score:3)
Not to seem cruel but it looks like the original problem was her being drunk in a bathroom at the age of 14.
Cruel? No. Ridiculously blaming the victim? Yes.
If you've never done anything stupid and embarrassing in front of someone else, then you've obviously lived a completely solitary life in a cave.
Italian Prosecutor? (Score:4, Insightful)
Italian Prosecutor. Enough said.
By any chance is this the same Italian prosecutor that went after Amanda Knox?
The Italian legal system is a total joke. Facebook can just sit on this, nothing will happen for years.
Re: (Score:3)
The Italian legal system is a total joke. Facebook can just sit on this, nothing will happen for years.
I won't disagree with your assessment. I will disagree with your attitude, however. Italy's government can and should be watching out for their citizens' wellbeing; It is the main role of any government. You're disrespecting the only recourse many Italian citizens have to injustice, and I do not feel that is appropriate or productive here. I understand what the parents are doing and even agree with the sentiments, but they're engaging the government in the wrong way.
There are better ways to handle this than
Re: (Score:3)
It's not an unreasonable requirement if that's what they really want. Online betting sites are required to verify age with a fair degree of certainty. If the limit is 18 then there are plenty of ways to do it. If they want to require Facebook Italy (yes, it exists) to be more diligent then that's their prerogative.
Parent's should be monitor their kids (Score:3)
Parents should be monitor their kids. I don't think it's facebooks fault, they really have no way of telling if people are using real names & real ages. Let alone verifying any of the info.
I'd like to see the video, because I'm wondering if it was really bad, or if she was suicidal and it was a good enough excuse. I do remember when I was 14 and it seemed like everything evolved around the world i was in, and everything seems like it mattered and was important. Then again, I guess if my less then memorial moments were captured on video, i don't know.
But I think Italy needs to be talking to the parents, not facebook.
Re: (Score:3)
Ummm...
Do you believe that children are less inventive now then when you were a kid?
Did you ever do something you didn't want your parents to know about and succeed at it?
Why would you think children today are any different? I'll be shocked if my daughter when she's 30 doesn't have teenaged secrets I know nothing about. Shocked and probably a bit sad.
Let's look at the obvious ways my daughter could get access to facebook without me knowing (oh and I work in infosec, so I'm probably harder to fool then mos
Blurred Boundaries (Score:5, Interesting)
Once again the internet blurs the boundaries between public/publishing and private. On one hand this is like complaining to the paper company because someone wrote a nasty note using one of their products. On the other hand web sites do control the means of publishing and bear some responsibilities.
Note they are currently simply exploring. From the prosecutor: "This is an open investigation without named suspects, as yet. Facebook itself is not under investigation."
Bullying must stop (Score:4, Insightful)
This is undoubtedly singing the same tune that will most likely go on for decades to come but bullying must be brought to a end.
Parenting can only go so far - it's ridiculous to assume that telling your adolescent and hormonal child to be strong in the face of adversary will stop them from killing themselves. This poor girl left a note apologising for not being strong enough.
There's also no chance that one parent will lecture or attempt to teach another a child that bullying is wrong - that's, unfortunately, not their place. Of course, one parent could talk to another but that's only if they know.... which if often not the case.
However, there should be some figure of authority that should be able to do something...
If bullying is witnessed in the playground, a teacher would usually bring it to an end, and (hopefully) punish the bully - lecture them, make them sincerely apologise, etc. Although there's been ridiculous cases where teachers end up lecturing the bullied - that just infuriates me.
So, if this would occur in the schools and playgrounds, why not in the digital realm? It shouldn't be Facebook staff, in this case, but it should be the parents at the least. They really need to look after what their children are doing and what's happening to them. Facebook and other social media sites are just giant playgrounds for kids except there's no teachers around and that's always a recipe for disaster.
Of course, this should be all within reason - don't exactly want parents digitally stalking their kids 24/7 but it's not difficult to just check peoples walls every once in a while...
Anyway, that's enough ranting - hopefully that all makes sense.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is that facebook DOES NOT respond to "report this post" unless it's a porn report.
It happened to me: someone impersonated my business and I tried for days to have facebook shut down the offending account, using my name and logo. Facebook didn't give a fuck - even after MY page has been online for 3 years AND I'm a facebook ads PAYING CUSTOMER.
Bullying is older than facebook. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
A major difference is that thanks to Facebook the whole world can learn about the alleged misbehaviour of people. Not just a select group of peers. And Facebook nor the Internet forget - so five, ten years from now such information can still be found.
Whatever stupid things I did when I was young were known by my friends/peers, most of whom I have no contact with any more, and pretty much all of it has been forgotten. And certainly can not be dug up by random third parties.
Re: (Score:3)
Facebook is to blame because they don't take "reports" seriously. Unless it's about porn.
Re: (Score:3)
The bullies are to be blamed for the death, not facebook. May be facebook with its detailed logs can help us find the passive audience who watched the bullying and did nothing to stop. May be we can teach the passive by standers how they could help assuage the hurt feelings of the bully victim behind the scenes etc. I think the by standers are the real key in solving bullying issue. If we could find a way to make them side with the victim without exposing themselves bullying might eventually get solved
News agencies are held responsible for the images they publish. Facebook is no less accountable.
Re: (Score:3)
The bullies should not be blamed for the girl's death either. What they did was bad. I don't defend it at all. But suicide is not a reasonably foreseeable outcome of it.
Punch somebody, they fall backwards and break their neck. Death is not a "reasonably foreseeable outcome" of a simple fistfight, but you can still be charged with involuntary manslaughter.
This won't be popular... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:4, Insightful)
'Italian law forbids minors under 18 signing contracts, yet Facebook is effectively entering into a contract with minors regarding their privacy, without their parents knowing.''
how is facebook allowing this? did facebook buy the people internet connections? did facebook force her to sign up? did facebook force her to get hammered and act a fool?
Look, i understand all the facebook hate. and a lot of it is just, no question about that. but you cant blame facebook for any of this
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
did facebook force her to sign up?
Irrelevant, since the crap wasn't posted on her account.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet the US is adamant in it's right to enforce it's laws on internet presences that are not based in the US because they are used by US citizens. You can't have it both ways.
More importantly, just cause Facebook is based in the US doesn't mean that's the only law it has to worry about if it does business in other countries. You aren't going to allow foreign owned companies to ignore US laws while operating in the US.
The only way this comment would make any sense would be if Facebook specifically blocked anyone who wasn't a US citizen from using their service. They not only don't do that, they actively advertise and monetize in other countries.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet the US is adamant in it's right to enforce it's laws on internet presences that are not based in the US because they are used by US citizens. You can't have it both ways.
I've seen commercial entities based in the US request via the USDOJ and other entities that other countries put pressure on internet presences not in the US in an attempt use US laws as a hammer.
I've seen the USDOJ and other entities become complicit in communicating the requests to other countries.
I've seen the governments and agencies thereof bend over for the US by complying with the request.
I've seen the internet presences bend over for their own government agencies.
But other than invading Nicaragua and kidnapping Manuel Noriega to put him on trial in the US, I haven't really seen the US enforcing US laws abroad. In fact, I've seen them keep GITMO open, despite campaign promises by three presidents, precisely so that they have a place controlled by the US military so they can store prisoners there and specifically NOT have to comply with US law.
The first two observations are the US' fault, at least in the general sense of "Blame the US for the actions of RIAA/MPAA/whoever, which is generally reviled by the average US citizen who cares one way or the other".
The last two observations are the fault of the target country and the internet presences in that target country having no backbones, and that's all on you.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:4, Interesting)
To be fair, we're talking about Italy. This is a country that jails seismologists, throws out acquittals, and can't get a single charge to stick on Berlusconi. There aren't a lot of places where you can say the US judicial system has better moral standing, but compared to the Italian system, it does--by a long shot.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems you are referring to those seismologists who were sentenced for "not having predicted the L'Aquila earthquake". This is not correct: they were sentenced, and rightly so, for having misled the public that there was a certainty that no earthquake was going to happen. That's different from saying that there was no certainty it was going to happen. Their (very public) statements convinced many to return to their homes, and die there when the earthquake happened.
It seems you are referring to the fact that in Italy prosecutors can appeal an acquittal. This is a possibility in any European country I know of. If anything, the US is special in that new information cannot be used to reopen a case after the defendant has been pronounced innocent only one time.
Why actually there is one. He has dodged a lot but he was sentenced for tax evasion (same as Al Capone, guess what) and already lost an appeal. There is a very real chance he will be convicted in the last degree of appeal this year and will be automatically thrown out of the Parliament. While of course he should have gone to jail long ago, and flaws in the Italian system allowed him to get off scot-free on many an occasion, but prosecutors in the Italian system have not given him preferential treatment for being a powerful politicial.
On the other hand, I have not heard about a single US prosecutor indicting G. W. Bush for starting a war of aggression. That's way worse than tax evasion, corruption, rape or murder. That's the same crime of Nuremberg. Same goes for indicting Dick Cheney for aiding and abetting torture, international kidnapping ring (known as "extraordinary renditions"), or Obama for international terrorism (because that's what drone strikes are).
The US system still practices death penalty, and is based on Common Law (just a notch above tribal law). The Italian system, for all its shortcomings, is not going to get you killed. Also, in lawsuits, the losing part can be and often is sentenced to pay for the other part's legal costs, so frivolous lawsuits are much less common than in the US. Thank you very much, we will keep our Roman-Napoleonic code.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Funny)
The only way this comment would make any sense would be if Facebook specifically blocked anyone who wasn't a US citizen from using their service.
Please, can they. - Non-US Citizen
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Of course not. However, if I decided to locate offices on those countries then yes I would expect to have study their laws and comply with them.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Funny)
Seriously? FB doesn't have to comply within other countries' laws when they are operating there?
That's a new one. So, Samsung, Sony, Honda, Earl Grey, and other international companies based outside of US don't have to comply with US laws even when they operate in USA?
Glad to hear that.
You're the Mucking Foron of the day.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Informative)
How is Facebook operating in Italy?
Perhaps by having a sales office in Milan [techcrunch.com]?
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:4, Interesting)
Completely relevant.
Agreed, and moreover for the part of the complaint is that Facebook entered into a contract with the minor, the crap posted on any account would seem to be irrelevant. Really the question is whether agreeing to the ToS constitutes a binding contract in Italy.
Facebook has no obligation to police content to comply with the laws of any nation except the USA.
FB has an obligation to abide by the law of any country in which they do business. However that obligation would be enforceable only in countries in which they have a corporate presence.
Everyone else can fuck right on off.
Comity: look it up!
Re: (Score:3)
Leaving aside the international question, even in the US contracts entered into by a minor are considered invalid. Facebook does nothing to try to actively restrict access to legal adults even according to US law. There is nothing legally that Facebook can do to enfor
Re: (Score:3)
even in the US contracts entered into by a minor are considered invalid.
You're incorrect. In the US, minors can enter into contracts, but up until their 18th birthday, they can unilaterally rescind any contracts entered into while they were a minor for any reason. As such, one can enter into contracts with minors so long as one accepts the risk therein. Once a minor hits 18, any contracts entered into while they were a minor become fully enforceable unless they've already rescinded them.
Re: (Score:3)
If they don't want to deal w/ Italian law then they're free to prohibit people in Italy from using Facebook.
While this is technically true, italy is also free to prohibit its citizens from using facebook.
Where do you honestly think the responsibility should exist?
Seems to me that expecting me to prevent people from country X from accessing my site hosted in my home country of Y, just because country X has issues with its content, is a extremely onerous expectation to be applying to me.
I would argue that any sort of law enforcement in site owners on such matters is completely bankrupt of morality.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. If someone publishes abusive remarks about you in a newspaper, it doesn't matter if you subscribe to the newspaper or not. You can still sue them, and depending on the jurisdiction you and the newspaper (or Facebook) are in, you might just even win.
The First Amendment stipulates that Congress may not pass laws that prohibit people from expressing their ideas or opinions. If you think the President is utterly wrong about something, you're free to say so, and you don't need to fear any persecution from the government. However, the First Amendment is not a license to say anything you want about anybody without consequences. If you write something false that defames the President's reputation, he can sue you for libel.
The First Amendment goes beyond words, as well. Actions such as protests or demonstrations can be considered speech, but the limits on actions are even harsher. Your free expression may not infringe on anybody else's rights. That means your protest can't block a business, harass someone, disrupt traffic, or damage property. You'll face legal consequences for all of those. If your "speech" is a threat (and you show sufficient capability and intent to follow through with that threat), the person you're threatening may even be able to legally kill you in self-defense.
The First Amendment is not a weapon that you can use to attack someone. It is a freedom that you can use to ensure your ideas are available to the world.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
This is more like people talking crap about you over a telephone rather than a newspaper. A newspaper has editors that have to read everything in it.
You don't sue the phone company for what people say on the phone.
Re: (Score:3)
The Republicans would love this. Obama would have to make himself and his entire staff open to being deposed, and all related documents,emails, etc related to the topic would have to be made available to the Republicans.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
did facebook force her to sign up? did facebook force her to get hammered and act a fool?
As far as I understand, the incident has nothing to do with her even having a FB account. The videographers who recorded her being drunk did have an account; but that has nothing to do with *their* privacy (such as of the account owner.)
In essence, FB is being sued for allowing someone else (the people who recorded the video) to post that video for everyone to see. That video was offensive to some other people. How would FB censors, even if FB had them, know what is and what isn't offensive?
In the end, it will be judged by the fact whether FB had a certain duty, and they failed at that duty. I suspect FB has no duty to watch users' videos. With regard to the contract, I am not sure if there was a contract. Most of the Web operates without an explicitly defined contract. It is hard to even establish competence over the Internet; and most services are free in every aspect. Can FB be guilty of giving access to a child? Depends on what that child said about his age. Most likely the EULA says "By clicking "Accept" I verify that I am of certain age and of legal age to form a contract." If the child did that, he misled the service provider and fraudulently obtained access to FB. The FB has no way to verify his age. It could be even impossible with EU's strict privacy laws.
Re: (Score:3)
the only people to blame for the girls death are sadly the girl. she killed herself, no one else.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
If they try to hold Facebook liable, they've got an uphill battle.
Facebook has a well-documented history of working to block pre-teen minors from getting accounts, and also for requiring parental consent for teenage minors. They publish their stats, and last year's report was that about 38% of minor accounts were illegal. That is actually a really good number.
The girl was underage. She either filled out the forms properly and had parental consent *OR* she committed fraud and misrepresented her age or her parental consent.
That will play out thusly in court:
From the allegations: ''Italian law forbids minors under 18 signing contracts, yet Facebook is effectively entering into a contract with minors regarding their privacy, without their parents knowing.''
Facebook: We do everything we can to prevent children from committing fraud. Your daughter created an account on [datestamp]. The law required us to ask these questions, and we did. We sent the privacy forms to [email address] on [datestamp] and got a confirmation on [datestamp]. We met the standard required by law. You or your daughter committed fraud.
Court: The paper-trail meets the legal requirements. Dismissed.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:4, Informative)
A contract, a real life contract, needs a real signature on a real piece of paper
I don't know about Italy specifically, but in most places you do not need a piece of paper with hand written signatures to have a contract. Paper contracts are used for "important" stuff because it offers a simple way for proving afterwards that there indeed was a contract and what it's terms were.
If a written contract was necessary, how would two illiterate people agree on things?
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Informative)
From TFA:
'Francesco Saluzzo, the Novara prosecutor, said he did not rule out investigating Facebook staff. He was investigating how the video had stayed online ''for days''.
''There is a procedure for asking for the removal of messages that break rules,'' he said. ''This is an open investigation without named suspects, as yet. Facebook itself is not under investigation. But we could theoretically investigate employees of Facebook who failed to respond to these requests.''
So the investigation may include whether Facebook followed it's own procedures. Quotes from the parents' oganisation are not quotes from the legal authorities.
It matters. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know about the laws in Italy (and I am not a lawyer anywhere) but that doesn't really matter as far as I know in the US. Look at the story of Traci Lords. She used fake ID to make porn when she was 16 and there was, at least at the time, no way the other people making it could tell it was fake (it wasn't that hard to do back then). They were still at least charged. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traci_Lords#Porn_career [wikipedia.org]
All charges were dismissed against these men when it was revealed that the US Government had issued Traci Lords a US Passport indicating the false age under the name "Kristi Nussman". The US government had attested that she was above the age of consent at the time the films were made. This is somewhat similar to the Aaron Swartz case, at least in that government misconduct resulted in a crime.
The Traci Lords circus is a bad analogy for the case of the Italian girl, since, given that the girl could not legally enter into the license agreement with FB under Italian law, there was no contract. No contract = no case.
This is a case of grieving parents who are looking for someone to blame for their grief, and an Italian magistrate who is willing to be complicit in attempting to blame FB, nominally on behalf of the grieving parents, but probably with some political motivation. Politics in Italy are largely viewed by the rest of the world to be about grandstanding for publicity, and then riding the resulting wave into office. There have been many articles in US periodicals about this, the most (in)famous one being Ilona Staller's run for, and election to, parliament.
Re: (Score:3)
Interesting that she was from Steubenville, Ohio and got into porn after she was raped at age 10.
Sounds like that place has had issues for a while now.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:4, Informative)
Facebook knows that minors are signing up for the service, it's a big part of their business model. So it's hypocritical of them to think that a "click to accept" faux contract should absolve them.
At least in the USA, only minors 12 or younger need parental consent. That is the age limit set by COPPA [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
'Italian law forbids minors under 18 signing contracts, yet Facebook is effectively entering into a contract with minors regarding their privacy, without their parents knowing.''
how is facebook allowing this? did facebook buy the people internet connections? did facebook force her to sign up? did facebook force her to get hammered and act a fool?
Since the base of the suit is: "FB entered into a contract with minors", here are some choices:
1. Assuming FB maintains their ToS (which acts as a binding contract), it should avoid entering in contract with minors. Question: how are others (e.g. porn sites) making sure underage persons don't have access?
2. Assuming FB drops their ToS, thus no binding contract whatsoever, minors or not. Question: should FB still be allowed to operate?
Can you see other solutions allowing FB to operate under legislation for
Re: (Score:3)
But the claim is that she had no relationship with Facebook.
The girl had a Facebook account, and wrote her suicide note on it.
FTFA: she leapt to her death from her third-floor bedroom window, writing on Facebook: ''Forgive me if I am not strong. I cannot take it any longer.''
Facebook keeps a digital paper trail on their accounts for when they signed up, the email accounts used, the age they said they were, and parental verification emails. If the parents didn't know she was on Facebook then the girl committed fraud. It will be easy for Facebook to prove they jum
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Facebook is an american company freedom of speech, even speech we dont like is legal
it is so sad that you actually believe that
Re: (Score:2)
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:4, Insightful)
you dont believe in freedom of speech?
Not the OP, but I believe in Freedom of Speech. I also know that it doesn't, and shouldn't, mean that you can harass people.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Informative)
Facebook is an american company freedom of speech, even speech we dont like is legal i feel bad for the girl being bullied but i dont blame anyone for their death who kills themselves except for them.
not ALL speech is legal in the US. take the "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" example. or cases of defamation.
in some US jurisdictions, there are laws criminalizing severe verbal harassment and there are actionable torts for intentional and/or negligent infliction of emotional distress.
too many folks in the US misunderstand exactly what the First Amendment entails.
in addition, there are arguments for why Facebook should be subject to Italy's laws. if they benefit from any way by doing business in Italy with Italians, those persons would at least have an argument that any harm Facebook does as a company against Italians should have consequences.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
i feel bad for the girl being bullied but i dont blame anyone for their death who kills themselves except for them
Fuck you and your ivory tower. Having been bullied to the point of considering suicide several times when I was a kid, I can tell you without a doubt, the bullies are accessories to the death. A human can only take so much abuse before they crack; juvenille minds even more so.
I have zero tolerence for bullies. They should be treated like criminals.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:4, Interesting)
The discussions over bullying puts too much focus on the bully (what makes someone a bully?) and not enough on the bullied (what makes people prone to being bullied?).
The simple truth is that if you are a kid who's sensitive, can't laugh at yourself, or are embarrassed easily, then you're definitely going to get bullied. Other kids will sense your weakness and jump on you like a pack of wolves. The best advice for bully-prone kids is not to "stand up" to bullies. If you're doing that, you've already lost. You need to accept what you are and be comfortable with it.
Comedians say it best. Fast forward to 3:10:
http://media.mtvnservices.com/embed/mgid:uma:videolist:mtv.com:1689785 [mtvnservices.com]
Dwarves speaking to bastards explain it pretty well, too.
Re: (Score:3)
Did you ever stand up for yourself? Fight back?
Sure, the awkward 120lb bookish loner is going to beat up the 4 180lb jocks who literally walk all over him.
Sometimes you can stand up to the bullys. Sometimes not.
Teach children to have self esteem and know that what other people think doesn't really matter, and nothing a bully does can affect them.
And you are back in your ivory tower.
If bullies know that you will fight back or that they have no power over you, they will move on.
Yeah. Sure. If one has to de
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
No, neither of you did because you weren't pushed enough. This makes you luckier than others not superior, as you'd like to believe.
Everyone has a tipping point. All it takes is to destroy all of a person's hope.
Re: (Score:3)
People who do a lot of bullying can put a lot of effort into it. Insane? Hardly. It gives them more popularity [suicide.org], improves their mood when they're suffering by pushing the suffering on someone else, gives them the joy of controlling their environment (the bullied), and there is very little chance they'll receive much punishment for it if any. It's quite rational behavior. Awful maybe, but hardly ins
Re: (Score:3)
Would this be an issue if this video was posted up on times square? I think so. The only difference being facebook is a tad more private than a public broadcast. But I'm interested to hear peoples opinions none-the-less.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
Get a grip. Freedom of speech does not cover harrasment, and was never intended to. It's supposed to be about freedom to express your political views without fear of repercussion from the government.
Taking videos of drunk teenagers and then posting it for all to see on the internet is a gross violation of privacy, verging on criminal harrasment. Whilst the bullies are not to blame for her death, they certainly contributed.
That said it's pretty much got nothing to do with Facebook and everything to do with the parents of all of the teenagers involved - the victim and the bullies. Why were they not monitoring their children's online behavior?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:4, Informative)
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Informative)
and I still blame the parents. where were they when their 14 year old daughter was out getting drunk??? Does no one believe in taking responsibility for themselves (or their kids) anymore?
And you never did anything wrong as a teen, never did anything your parent's didn't want you to?
The problem here is that facebook was not the cause, facebook was the medium. The problem here is older than facebook, the internet and wireless communications. The problem is something society has continually refused to blame, yet alone act against for generations.
It wasn't facebook who put the video up, it was facebook that tormented the girl... it was the bullies.
So the parent's are suing facebook when they should be suing the bullies and their parents. But then again, bullying is permitted and facebook is the root of all evil according to social Norm (Norm's a bit of a wanker it seems).
Re: (Score:3)
More importantly, Facebook has money and the bullies are probably broke. It's also highly likely that the bullies are kids, and can't be sued because they're under legal age.
So the parents are going for whatever money they can get.
Shame on them. Begging for blood money from an organization that's not at fault.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Pot, meet Kettle (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I the only one that finds it hilarious that Americans - home of the most ludicrous legal system...
Really? I'd think North Korea would be at the top of the list at least, with at least a few others until we hit the USA... But hey, as long as we're throwing all perspective out the window, this is obviously the most ludicrous comment I've seen on Slashdot. Maybe I should sue you for defaming the US on the internet, hmmmm? After all, this comment could cause many innocent deaths from violent Americans who have been incensed by your comment. Someone needs to be held responsible. That's the ethical thing to do.
Re: (Score:3)
Seriously, with the whole "smart gun" debate, and the political capital of child porn and underage sexting, I'm surprised camera companies aren't targets. The most basic thing would be a universal identifier embedded into pictures linking them to the source. Then there would be stuff like requiring an adult to copy pictures from a camera so underaged people can't send picture texts or upload pictures to the internet. Then we just need some algorithms that identify questionable images and automatically send