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

Long Italian tradition of standing up for the weak

[elrous0]

Sometimes Youtube is like some sort of arena where the weak are abused for the mere amusement of the masses. And of course, Italians would never put up with such a vile spectacle!

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.

Re:no boarders

[$RANDOMLUSER]

No. Borders are the things on s and s.

Re:no boarders

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

You know you've always wanted an internet where IP law is handled by the Americans, politically controversial material by the Germans, porn by the Iranians, and dissidents by the Chinese.

No, wait, never mind. That's hell I'm talking about.

Re:no boarders

[Plutonite]

Somewhere in hell, in some dark corner of a particularly nasty pit, there is a small chair with your UID carved on it. Freaks.

Italy, eh?

[girlintraining]

That's a bit machiavellian of them.

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).

Prosecutors in Italy are stupid...

[fabrica64]

You may not know it but many prosecutors here in Italy are well known for being quite stupid and just trying to appear on newspapers. Laws in Italy are sometimes so complicated that they can justify any kind of "crime"

Re:Prosecutors in Italy are stupid...

[plague3106]

Well, thank god that never happens in the USA!

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.

Re:At least they know their priorities

[brainnolo]

The boys who harred and attacked the child were already prosecuted in 2006.

Re:Long Italian tradition of standing up for the w

[Anonymous Coward]

Too soon.

Why go after Google?

[Clandestine_Blaze]

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.

Re:Why go after Google?

[orzetto]

[...] prosecutors in Italy decide to go after Google?

Prosecutors do not decide what to prosecute in Italy. Felonies, when reported, must always be investigated. In this case, it was the ministry of Interior that sent in a complaint, and prosecutors are only doing their job. Should they decide to start a trial instead of archiving the case, then there will be a reason to insult them.

Re:Anyone else getting sick and tired of "advocacy

[russotto]

I swear, it needs to become harder for people to form not-for-profit corporations and become "advocates" and activists. Too often such groups are good for nothing other than raising a stink over nothing, suing others, acting in petty, partisan ways, etc.

Why don't you found a 501(c)(3) corporation to work for the banning of such groups?

Re:Long Italian tradition of standing up for the w

[Facegarden]

Now that's funny - why'd you go and post as AC?

Sorry i was in a hurry and i wasn't logged in...

Just kidding, i didn't post that. Hah. Or did i? Really i just wanted to ensure that if someone stepped up to the plate after this, it would be sufficiently confusing that one could never know if they were really the OP! Hah! Oh god, i need a life...
-Taylor

Re:Long Italian tradition of standing up for the w

[Facegarden]

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

In case you never saw a mafioso...

[orzetto]

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 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, 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.