Four Google Officials Facing Charges In Italy For Errant Video

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."

Comments

no boarders

[LandDolphin]

Seems that the internet having no boarders is being used by courts to extend their reach (e.g. Kentucky). This certainly does look like a good road to be traveling down.

corporations

[Lord Ender]

How on earth are they suing individuals? Google is a corporation and must be treated as such under the law.

Re:corporations

[Duradin]

The problem is under which country's laws are they protected, under which are they not protected and which country actually has jurisdiction.

Re:corporations

[Brian Gordon]

Yeah but good luck extraditing american citizens for a non-case. An american judge would throw out the case in an instant, and an american judge would deny extradition just as fast.

Re:corporations

[nanoflower]

Gee... Never having to travel to Italy but allowed to travel the rest of the world.. Hmm. I think I can live with that... Besides, Italy wouldn't even try to extradite these guys since I doubt the punishment if found guilty is that harsh. What's strange is that they aren't spending their time finding the people who actually did harrass the kid. It's doubtful that the child even knows about Youtube or what it means for the video to be up there so it's not like putting the video up is causing him harm. Doing the actual harrassment is the real harm and is what should be punished.

Re:corporations

[pmontra]

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.

Itally Not Prudent

[bill_mcgonigle]

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:Itally Not Prudent

[tmosley]

I don't think there is anywhere they could move that would have a LESS tolerant reception, so it doesn't really matter if they move. It can only stay about the same or get better.

Re:Itally Not Prudent

[Lord Ender]

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).

Related US Law

[ApharmdB]

For anyone who has managed a web forum (or yahoo group or whatever) and been sued for defamation/libel over material posted by a 3rd party - Is Section 230 of the Federal Communications Decency Act the relevant US law to be used in one's defense?

It seems to be appropriate, but does anyone have personal experience?

At least they know their priorities

[Anonymous Coward]

Predictably, it doesn't state anywhere that Italian prosecutors are going after the boys who harassed and attacked a handicapped child.