Italy Google Conviction Makes Internet Censorship History
posted by Olivia Mistelle Maxell 2-25-2010
Wednesday, Italy convicted three Google executives of violating privacy laws for permitting a 2006 video of a disabled Italian boy being bullied to be posted online. At the time the video in question appeared on Google Video which is a service now provided by YouTube.
On the heals of the Google censorship efforts in China, Turkey, Thailand, India and Argentina, this conviction is the first of it’s kind the internet’s long history and is being hailed by critics as “the biggest threat to internet freedom we have seen.”
Google spokesman for Italy, Marco Pancini made a state after the ruling.
“This verdict is an attack on the fundamental principles of liberty on which the internet freedom is built. “We will be appealing against this verdict because the people in question had nothing to do with the uploading of the footage, they did not film it and they did not view it. 'The executives took on this case with courage and dignity despite the excesses of justice – the responsibility of what goes on the web is always down to the person who uploads it.”
Vivi Down, a Down syndrome support group were said to be “very satisfied’ with the verdict.
Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi
Italy’s Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, who has monopolized Italy’s mainstream media, was preparing to black out the internet so the hate sites and fan pages praising attacks on him and other officials were not accessible. The premier’s censorship tactic was abandoned after Facebook, Google, and Microsoft executives agreed to a ‘shared code of conduct’ rather than going into legislation. According to a recent article on Time.com Berlusconi is trying to implement a license process for people who frequently upload videos.
Being a victim of cyber bullying/cyber stalking, I believe there should be strict laws established to prosecute offenders. The online venue any person(s) uses as tool to harass and threaten another person should only be held accountable if appropriate action against the abuse wasn’t taken or regulations were not already established. I mean, shouldn’t social networks and media outlets limit how much ‘freedom’ a person has to use their services as a means to intimidate, slander, or threaten another individual?
Now, I also believe in freedom of speech. Some do exercise their first amendment right as a means to push hate and bigotry, but if we strip them of their rights, then we ultimately will be limiting our rights as well. In places such as Italy and China where the population’s news is limited to what the government approves, the internet is the only media outlet for their citizens outside the boundaries of the countries censorships. I mean could you imagine if the only news or information we American’s were allowed to get came from Fox? That’d be like clipping the wings of our perception and we wouldn’t have the appropriate information to base our values and beliefs accordingly.
Remember, it’s easier to manipulate and control people if you stifle their voices and limit their resources.
Categories: Technology, News
Tags: olivia mistelle maxell google conviction italy internet censorship cyberbullying google silvio berlusconi
"Some do exercise their first amendment right as a means to push hate and bigotry, but if we strip them of their rights, then we ultimately will be limiting our rights as well."
Ding ding ding!
I have lived in Italy, and though I love that country, I will say that there are some basic aspects of human rights and freedom that many Italians don't understand. For example, in Italian, there is no word for "privacy." In Italy, the most important thing is the group, not the individual. Personally, I believe that the group is best off when its individual members are acting on their own best interests within a "free market"-type situation. Italians who believe strongly in personal freedoms, especially in a case like this one, are generally outcasts.
Since there are already laws in place that forbid people from harming others (stalking, for example), I don't believe we need to make any more laws with respect to the internet.
In the states, I feel that the only two real beacons of hope we have left in terms of personal freedom and the Second Amendment and the internet. Everything else is rotating around the bowl quickly (full body scans at the airport, etc).
Thanks for the article! I love stuff like this. Pretty interesting stuff. The real purpose of freedom of speech is to protect the speech of those with unpopular views, not those who are just repeating the mainstream stuff.
Reply to this
I didn't get the restraining orders. Why? Because they live out of state. Now, their counties sheriff held me out, but no laws protecting me against being consistently stalked by them. Myspace had to literally his wife's account down. It was awful. That's why I put my middle name in everything...harder to search and find me.
Reply to this
Christ, that's horrendous about the stalking. It's a fine line: respecting everyone's right to freedom of speech, while still dealing with situations like yours. When it comes to personal safety, I have little faith in the law, so one of my tactics has been to be public about my gun ownership and self-defense training. Be safe, Olivia.
I had the opportunity to live in Italy. I'm so grateful for it because it was one of the key learning experiences in my life. Not to mention the women are beautiful!
Reply to this