Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

YouTube Legally Considered a TV Station In Italy

Posted by Soulskill on from the legislation-to-facilitate-prosecution dept.

orzetto writes "Italian newspaper La Repubblica reports that YouTube and similar websites based on user-generated content will be considered TV stations (Google translation of Italian original) in Italian law, and will be subject to the same obligations. Among these, a small tax (500 €), the obligation to publish corrections within 48 hours upon request of people who consider themselves slandered by published content, and the obligation not to broadcast content inappropriate for children in certain time slots. The main change, though, is that YouTube and similar sites will be legally responsible for all published content as long as they have any form (even if automated) of editorial control. The main reason for this is probably that it will force YouTube to assume editorial responsibility for all published content, which facilitates the ongoing € 500M lawsuit of Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi against YouTube because of content copyrighted by Berlusconi's TV networks that some users uploaded on YouTube. Berlusconi's Spanish TV station, TeleCinco, was previously defeated in court on the grounds that YouTube is not a content provider."

24 of 254 comments (clear)

  1. Pretty much completely infeasible. by nonzzero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The best response to this would be "No more YouTube for Italy!"

    1. Re:Pretty much completely infeasible. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Do you really think this isn't the intended result of this law? Silvio "Mr. Corruption" Berlusconi owns most major TV stations in Italy. He's in the perfect position to get rid of competition.

    2. Re:Pretty much completely infeasible. by by+(1706743) · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I could imagine YouTube voluntarily blocking Italian IPs (or Italy blocking YouTube), and a YouTube-via-proxy How-To being published in Italian (imagine that!). The result could be that YouTube "complies" with Italian law, Italians retain access to YouTube, and Berlusconi looks like an idiot.

      Here's to hoping!

    3. Re:Pretty much completely infeasible. by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I never understood how governments allow such conflict of interest... if you're a politician, your job is politics. Owning companies should make you ineligible to work in politics in the first place, or there should at least be requirements to occupy a function that's completely unrelated to the companies you own.

    4. Re:Pretty much completely infeasible. by statusbar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And any italian citizen sending a message to Berlusconi will get a "visit in the night" just like any other Berlusconi opposers receive.

      --
      ipv6 is my vpn
    5. Re:Pretty much completely infeasible. by mcvos · · Score: 3, Informative

      Berlusconi controls the government, and through the media, also the voters. He's made it obvious over the years that he doesn't consider this a conflict of interests, he considers it synergy.

    6. Re:Pretty much completely infeasible. by JockTroll · · Score: 3, Informative

      EU != Italy. Beluskaiser makes his own laws for his own advantage, like all petty dictators.

      --
      Geeks are so full of shit that "beating the crap out of them" takes a whole new meaning.
  2. Take that Italy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    In America, Dominos is legally considered pizza.

    1. Re:Take that Italy by Yvan256 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe, but you better be careful. If one Dominos restaurant ever goes down, they will all follow very quickly.

    2. Re:Take that Italy by Life2Short · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If YouTube is an Italian TV Station, where are the breasts?

  3. Wow by TheL0ser · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the obligation not to broadcast content inappropriate for children in certain time slots

    Given the nature of the internet being worldwide, that would be.... never.

    But seriously, how do they expect to enforce this??

    1. Re:Wow by TheL0ser · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not a problem. YouTube doesn't "broadcast".

      They're not a TV station either, but that doesn't seem to have registered with them either.

    2. Re:Wow by hedwards · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's Italy, so the appropriate term is "Berlusconi's bitches."

  4. This is what happens... by rm999 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is what happens when the leader of a country also controls the largest media conglomerate of that country. Control the media, and you control the people. Control the people, and you *keep* control of the media.

  5. Call it by arcsimm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    See, this is where I think Google should call Berlusconi's bluff. All they need to do is redirect Italian IPs to a page that says, "Due to the legal implications of new regulations, Google can no longer provide service to Italian site visitors" followed by a few informational links. Then, they just sit back and wait for public outcry to force the Italian government to backpedal, and continue on as usual.

    1. Re:Call it by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So what you are saying is that Google now has the power to bring down a democratically elected government?

      No, he's saying its people do. And this is how it's supposed to be.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    2. Re:Call it by dkleinsc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, that's what Silvio wants them to do. His goal is to eliminate major public venues in Italy that can be critical of him, he does most of that by owning the mass media, but he doesn't (and probably can't) buy Google. So if nobody in Italy can access Youtube, from Berlusconi's point of view the problem is solved.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    3. Re:Call it by gman003 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Google went toe-to-toe with the People's Republic of China, arguably the second-most-powerful nation on the planet. And they won. Sure, China didn't exactly lose, but Google got exactly what it wanted.

      Maga-corporations have nearly as much power as governments. Fortunately, Google seems to be one of the "good guys", for a slightly looser definition of "good" than I prefer.

  6. Re:When did Italy turn into by kyrio · · Score: 5, Funny

    Where can I purchase your bottled mind?

  7. Re:When did Italy turn into by santax · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ah, it's a nice change from the media owning the president :)

  8. Re:TV by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sudo Youtube is a TV Station.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  9. Hey look, a loophole... by bmo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "The main change, though, is that YouTube and similar sites will be legally responsible of all published content as long as they have any form (even if automated) of editorial control."

    Fine. Get rid of editorial control. All of it.

    But then the Italian version of the RIAA/MPAAA/ASCAP/Insert your acronym here, are barred from suing, because there isn't any responsibility for the content except by the posters themselves.

    Sounds fine by me.

    --
    BMO

  10. Google will do what it did in Korea by D+H+NG · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When South Korea passed a law that requires large websites with user-generated contents to collect user's personal information, Google simply disabled the uploading and commenting features in YouTube for Korean users and encouraged them to set their locale to some other country. This continued for a year, shining a spotlight on South Korea's stupid law until the government gave up and exempted YouTube from the law.

  11. Why would any other country help enforce this? by serutan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know Italy isn't exactly a renegade terrorist dictatorship or anything, but such actions by a government with such a blatant conflict of interest is just wrong in principle. I think the U.S. government should put on its white hat and publicly take a stand against this. I mean, suppose Rupert Murdoch became prime minister of Australia and decided to fine any website that contradicted Fox News. Why should the U.S. cooperate with that?

    Looking at it from a completely different angle, if putting videos where Italians can see them makes YouTube an Italian television station, then every website in the world that streams audio is an Italian radio station, and every news site is an Italian newspaper. The whole concept is patently ridiculous.