Slashdot Mirror
Italy Wants to Restrict Blogs
nx writes "Italy wants to restrict bloggers' rights by forcing everyone to register their blogs, pay a tax and have a journalist as a "responsible director". This law is clearly designed to curb critical voices and free speech, although it has yet to be approved by parliament."
I expect blogs to be taxed and licensed almost everywhere, eventually. We can't have people saying things critical of the governm....errr...I mean, we can't have people saying anything offensive. Will someone please think of the children????
My blog
So, what is the definition of a "blog" anyway?
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Like all laws in Italy which are unpopular and/or unenforceable they will be totally ignored by law-enforcement and people alike...
Although I'd be surprised if this law makes it through parliament without being heavily diluted, or at all...
There is no psychiatrist in the world like a puppy licking your face - Ben Williams
My blog
This law is clearly designed to curb critical voices and free speech, although it has yet to be approved by parliament."
That's one interpretation, yes, and in fact a good one. Nevertheless, it shouldn't be there. Linking to a blogger with strong opinions about the issue is one thing, but could we at least avoid biased summaries? The summaries are supposed to be about news, not opinion. If I wanted one-sided views, I'd read Digg.
Give us the story, facts-only. Let us decide if it's an assault on free speech. Allowing the reader to come to that conclusion on their own is far more powerful and effective.
I'm guessing links to articles with different opinions would be too much to ask for.
IMHO it is classic amongst European politicians. But this example is clearly the worst of all.
They write down law proposition for the Internet without using it.
They don't know how it works, all they know about it is what they read in the newspaper or what they heard in their pompeous conferences. They don't use emails, staffs check their mailbox for them..And print the relevant ones. They don't type, they 've got an assistant for that. A computer is a black box for them, like black magic. So they get scared, they need a way to connect this new tool to the old bureaucratic society that they understand.
And when you mix ignorance with the european left tendency to regulate/classify anything crawling on the surface of this planet. You end up with this monstruosity.
It might go against my USian belief in free speech, but I'd have a hard time arguing against this law if its merely placing blogs & websites under the same scrutiny as other publications.
... those shouldn't exist!"
Actually, that's what a lot of people find objectionable about these types of laws: that stringent regulation of "bad people" might actually apply to them too! (Sort of a variant of "a liberal is a conservative who's been arrested".)
I see this kind of thing all the time:
***
"I think it's HORRIBLE how corporations EXPLOIT all these tax loopholes to avoid paying their FAIR SHARE!"
"To consistently enforce tax law, we will have to monitor MMORPGs like World of Warcraft so as to insure income earned there is taxed."
"WHAT???? That's RIDICULOUS!"
***
"I think there should be STRINGENT regulations on businesses to make sure they don't DISCRIMINATE."
"Excuse me sir, your site, 'Craig's List' has acted in contravention of Fair Housing law so we're suing you."
"Er, what? I mean, those laws are for bad people, not me."
***
common internet discussion:
"Corporations are OBVIOUSLY inefficient. Look how easy it is to make something and sell it cheaper."
"Yeah, but you didn't obey these regulations and pay these taxes."
"Well
"And if they didn't, the corporation could sell for less."
"No, because they're inefficient."
*falls out of chair*
Apology to Ubuntu forum.
AlbertoP and the other one above citing corriere.it article are forgetting how facts actually evolved:
1) Draft law has been approved October, 12th
2) First on-line concernments exploded October, 19th
3) Asked about that, Mr Levi first replied: "It's not up to the government to establish that. It'll be for the Communications Authority to indicate with regulations, which people and which companies will have to register. And the regulations will arrive only after the law has been discussed and approved by the Lower House." - in other words "I don't care too much about what could happen to web sites and blogs. Eventually, someone other will fix (later) what i'm breaking (now)."
4) After many politicians expressed serious concern about the draft, and literally menaced to leave the government coalition (see: Antonio di Pietro's Blog - October, 20th) Mr Levi suddenly "changed opinion", releasing the interview AlbertoP refers to, in date October 23rd!!
So, the REAL STORY is:
Mr Levi has been caught with hands in the jam and immediately changed opinion. Wouldn't have been so, we in Italy were going to be mass-censored - exactly as posted by nx!
Cheers, Feanor.