Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Wikipedia Italy Blocks All Articles in Protest of EU's Ruinous Copyright Proposals (gizmodo.com)

Posted by msmash on from the fighting-back dept.

An anonymous reader writes: On Tuesday, Wikipedia Italy set all of its pages to redirect to a statement raising awareness for the upcoming vote that (barring some legislative wrangling) would make the copyright directive law. The statement reads, in part (emphasis theirs): On July 5, 2018, The Plenary of the European Parliament will vote whether to proceed with a copyright directive proposal which, if approved, will significantly harm the openness of the Internet . The directive instead of updating the copyright laws in Europe and promoting the participation of all the citizens to the society of information, threatens online freedom and creates obstacles to accessing the Web, imposing new barriers, filters and restrictions. If the proposal would be approved in its current form, it could be impossible to share a news article on social networks, or find it through a search engine; Wikipedia itself would be at risk.

80 comments

  1. More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Europeans voted for more government, and this is what more government looks like. It's rather hard to pity them.

    1. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The government was always there, even more so in the past. EU has liberalized the political machines somewhat, partially thanks to the involvement of UK and the like-minded in the EU, which is ironic in this case considering the history of copyright law. This is surely another compromise between multiple traditions of governance and copyright.

    2. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      WTF is wrong with your brain that you would think this is about pity? You should have that looked at.

      This is about "You voted for more government and here's one of the ways that you're about to get it .. unless you change your mind or at least take action to correct the fucking up of the various details of arbitrarily-expanding government. And actually, you still have time as long as you credibly threaten your politicians right now."

      America isn't asking for pity, either, BTW, despite our own disastrous political problems of our own making.

    3. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nope. It's what corruption looks like.

      And it's not the government which corrupts itself, btw, it's big business and money. So, the solution is more government - tighter control over lobbyists and bribing of officials - not less, which no doubt would make crap like this even more common. Evidence? Shit like this is everyday occurrences in the US, while it makes real news in the EU - which coincidentally is seen as practically communist by a lot of retarded Americans who have never set their foot outside North Bumfuck but are experts on everything on the Internet.

    4. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      rofl. government does something bad.
      but what is needed is more government.

    5. Re:More government by stephanruby · · Score: 2

      Italians let a media mogul buy up all the media under the guise of media consolidation.

      Then, that media mogul became Prime Minister.

      That's the reason they're so screwed.

    6. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is take two on the attempts by the copyright industry to get to loot Google, no more and no less. The Spanish copyright lobby tried to extort Google news, with the catastrophic consequence for them that Google simply closed the service. The German tried to extort them on their turf, and then Google simply stopped linking to them, which turned out so badly for them that they had to come crawling back and make special allowances for Google.

      This is about the same thing again, just on another level. It's still about greedy fuckers who can't stand seeing anyone else making any money, even if they have to cut off their own (and everyone else's as collateral damage) noses just to spite their faces. Hopefully sanity prevails over apathetic incompetence though, which otherwise generally is the biggest hurdle in the EU, not outright corruption like in the US.

    7. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But he's such a nice guy, with all those party girls!!!

      What do you mean, that you should read a candidate's political program??

    8. Re:More government by penandpaper · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I am really confused by this comment. Not sure if I agree with the premise that this is corruption because it seems like "corruption" is an easy answer for the lazy to say "anything the government does that I don't like is corruption".

      Even granting that, this is absolute retardation.

      Shit like this is everyday occurrences in the US, while it makes real news in the EU - which coincidentally is seen as practically communist by a lot of retarded Americans who have never set their foot outside North Bumfuck but are experts on everything on the Internet.

      Everyday occurrences? I assume you are referring to PACs and Citizens United. I find that hilarious because what it comes down to is the US is more supportive of free speech and less government intervention of political speech. God forbid someone make a documentary critical of a politician running for office and release that on the internet around the time of an election! The government should be able to restrict that kind of political speech because anything else is "corruption"!

      Maybe there is something wrong with you and your ideas if you think the government has the authority to restrict political speech because it happens to be around an election. Likewise, maybe there is something wrong with the government when it thinks it can pass absurd laws that infringe on the rights of their citizens. The US has it's problems but Europe seems more than content with overbearing government without the need of "corruption" from corporations.

      Why wold anyone mod that post informative?

    9. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Europeans vote for more government, and that's exactly what they get.

      Americans vote for less government, and they get so little government (over which they have some control) that they are now completely governed by corporate fascists (over which they have no control whatsoever).

    10. Re:More government by GregMmm · · Score: 2

      "And it's not the government which corrupts itself"

      I don't even know where I should start shooting holes in your "opinion" not fact.

    11. Re:More government by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      His post was perfectly clear, but your willful libertarian blindness probably blurred out those parts.

    12. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hard for industry to corrupt a government when there isn't much government to corrupt...

    13. Re:More government by penandpaper · · Score: 2

      Why is thinking "expanding authority" is not the answer to "expanding authority gone wrong" willful libertarian blindness? Are you saying "this time we'll get expanding authority right!"??

    14. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Let me have a stab at it. The people who modded it "informative" weren't confused by it and actually had the brainpower to understand what it said.

      The point is that in Europe, historically we've had very little of the bought and paid for politicians. It's a completely different culture where politicians not necessarily are wealthy people with corporate sponsors, e.g, the Swedish prime minister is (originally) a professional welder.

      That's probably no small part in as to why they generally have stayed closer to what the nation and their people actually want or need, as opposed to their sponsors. THIS event, is a pretty clear indication that the EU is going the way of the US. This proposal is written by and for the copyright industry. It benefits nobody but those you know as "the elite". It sacrifices the rights and freedoms of the ordinary people to give the powerful and influential more money and power.

      This is why it's corrupt; it serves the few at the cost of the many, with complete disregard for any collateral damage. We can only speculate about the exact motivations of the people pushing for this. Maybe they got paid off, maybe they were promised sponsorships, maybe they got completely bamboozled. What is pretty damned clear though is that politicians get their legitimacy by representing the people. This is not a policy which benefits the people, or even the states as such. It's benefactors are completely different people, who are manipulating the political system for their own personal benefits.

      There, that should do as an explanation.

    15. Re:More government by cayenne8 · · Score: 2
      If they pass this....

      Well, what's to stop the companies, like wikipedia, etc....from pulling all servers physically IN the EU, and just serving their content as they please from the remaining servers around the world?

      Sure, it might slow some pages loading a bit in the EU, but there would then be fuck-all they could do about them serving the content they wished....?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    16. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you want to corrupt something which isn't there to stop you from doing what you want? Laws exist for reasons, and if there is no authority backing them up, it's the same as lawlessness.

      If you say OK, we have laws, but it's up to everyone who can retain a lawyer, or a gunman, to uphold them, we get a plutocracy, which is pretty fucking far from ideal.

      But, hey, who am I to disagree? You could always move to some latin/central american hellhole, complete with death-squads and all. They all pretty much operate that way. Let us know what you think about life there then.

    17. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we've had very little of the bought and paid for politicians. It's a completely different culture where politicians not necessarily are wealthy people with corporate sponsors, ... no small part in as to why they generally have stayed closer to what the nation and their people actually want or need, as opposed to their sponsors

      That really doesn't explain anything other than your own prejudice.

      the EU is going the way of the US

      Even with Mickey Mouse, I don't think anything like these regulations could pass in the US. I could be wrong but I highly doubt it and would bet money that it would not hold up in court.

      It sacrifices the rights and freedoms of the ordinary people to give the powerful and influential more money and power.

      Do you think part of the problem is that the idea of rights in the EU are very weak? Again, I don't think this would stand up to any kind of scrutiny in the US because there is a stronger protection of rights. If the EU valued rights these kind of proposals would be DOA. But it seems that "rights and freedoms of ordinary people" translates into "privileges the mob decrees acceptable."

      We can only speculate about the exact motivations of the people pushing for this

      Yet, you seem perfectly willing to support your own conjecture and opinion as if it were infallible fact. Sounds rather religious to me.

      This is not a policy which benefits the people, or even the states as such. It's benefactors are completely different people, who are manipulating the political system for their own personal benefits.

      I find this funny because "the people" are made up of people that hold copyright. What you are saying is "the people can benefit at the expense of others so long as I feel comfortable with that exploitation". There is no value in rights of the individual and there is no value in protecting those rights against a mob rule. Sure, you can get people to vote to take away someone else property. It doesn't mean that is a good thing to do. Not even defending these laws but hot damn you are a mess.

    18. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least this will give Google and others more legal certainty so that they may operate more efficiently in the EU area and reduce their risk by making the inevitable conclusions, whatever those might be. The apathy will remain as long as countries like France and Germany think their economic force will produce automatically the best legislation and courses of action in the EU politics.

    19. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should read up on polycentric law (you won't) - just because I'm against the government doing something, doesn't mean that I'm against it being done at all.

    20. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It explains a lot. Too bad you apparently can't read.

    21. Re:More government by rahvin112 · · Score: 2

      It's not much different than ATT deciding that Google should pay them money so their users can access it uninterrupted. Or in other words the business policy of "it'd be a shame if something happened to your business" line of attack. This isn't any different it's just the copyright companies, in this case newspapers and such that are trying to troll Google for billions, even though Google provides these businesses a HUGE service.

      This is just the next round by trying to make it a tax rather than a per copyright fee so that Google can't negotiate their way out of it. I suspect they haven't fully realized how Google can counter this quickly and easily and turn it back around on the news providers by simply not linking to them at all, thereby negating the tax. I'm sure there will be news services that will spring up outside the EU and not subject to the tax that will be happy to take all the internet traffic the big news providers used to get.

    22. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bravo!! great comment! *appluading* *fapping* So amazing glad you could comment. Please keep up the good work. My fapping must continue.

    23. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (over which they have some control)

      Imagine being this gullible.

    24. Re:More government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can't read. Typed response.

      u wot m8

    25. Re:More government by Voice+of+satan · · Score: 2

      Are you certain you are not confusing with what happened in Belgium and (i think Germany). There was such a law about links and of course the day the law passed the newspapers were instantly delisted and they had to explicitly allow a free license to search engines to be reachable again.

      In Spain, it was a little bit different. Media companies had not the option of opting out of the remuneration scheme. So some services like Yahoo news were shut down immediately after the law passed.

      Some commentators speculated that the true goal of the law was to destroy smaller news company who depended on these search engine services but were much less tender with the government than more mainstream media.

      I do not know and i am posting on the top of my head so apologies for the eventual innacuracies.

    26. Re:More government by Altrag · · Score: 1

      Same thing as why American companies are all following gdpr regulations - international treaties would likely allow the EU to sue US companies that are serving Europeans, even if they aren't physically located in Europe (the company or the user, at least in the gdpr case.)

    27. Re:More government by Altrag · · Score: 2

      Because you're expanding authority either way - if the government doesn't run things, then private interests will. It's not a choice between "government" and "freedom," it's a choice between "government I have some tiny amount of control over via my vote" and "pseudo-government that can do whatever they want." Unless you live in the US of course where money is speech and can be used to just buy the government anyway.. I suppose in that case the only real difference is the amount of red tape companies like Verizon have to cut through to screw you. Not screwing you isnt a viable option in that environment.

    28. Re:More government by penandpaper · · Score: 0

      Because you're expanding authority either way

      So, let me make sure I understand this. Government passes obscene laws to expand the power of government to regulate the internet. A coward responds by saying: "the solution is more government - tighter control over lobbyists and bribing of officials". That is mocked as "to solve bad government we need more government" which is itself mocked as "willful libertarian blindness". And you suggest that either way it "expands authority"? I am baffled. How about not passing obscene laws that do not need to be solved by even more obscene laws?

      Private authority is not near the same as government authority. "Either way" is a very bad conflation. Expanding authority generally is only applicable to the government. Because private interests do not have authority but they do have rights. Governments have authority as part of its rights. Allowing private interests to manage their business how they see fit doesn't "expand their authority" as much as it is "exercising their rights". When governments regulate a new industry they are expanding the authority for which they operate to enforce law. Talk about misrepresentation.

      if the government doesn't run things, then private interests will

      Personally, I like being left alone. If the governments minds its own business I don't see a problem. Nothing wrong with private interests managing the interests of their property. It's not like a private business can strip you of your rights and throw you in prison.

      Unless you live in the US of course where money is speech and can be used to just buy the government anyway

      See my other comment for that. Yes, I don't think the government can restrict political speech of which has been alluded to in this thread as "tighter control over lobbyists and bribing of officials". In the US you are innocent until proven guilty. If you cannot prove quid pro quo why do you say it was a bribe? Citizens United, which talks about "money is speech", was a case about a documentary critical of a politician being released close to an election. That is "tighter control over lobbyists and bribing of officials" that so many are quick to parade around. Yet, it falls under "obscene laws that require more obscene laws" to "fix" toward your personal flavor of politics.

    29. Re:More government by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      This country was pretty good about free expression before it elected a president that continually attacks the Free press for printing facts

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    30. Re:More government by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      I'll be concerned when people are arrested or fined. No one is scared to speak out which is a testament I don't think any journalist in America is afraid to speak even if the president calls them fake news.

  2. Yes, yesssss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Let the hate flow through you. The EU is a sinking ship.

  3. Re:Federal Prison is coming, Trumpies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    jesus what are you even trying to say

  4. A Win for the EU by Zorro · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is actually the goal. Not a side effect.

  5. Information Wants to be Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's what I told my HR girl when she heard that I had been telling people my salary, and it was one of the founding principles of the Internet. You're free to ignore what you want, but you can't stop people from knowing what they want.

    1. Re:Information Wants to be Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't hate Israel and want it wiped off the map, you are a Nazi!

  6. Doesn't matter by Comboman · · Score: 2

    Europeans voted for more government, and this is what more government looks like. It's rather hard to pity them.

    This is what government controlled by corporate interests looks like. Big or small, left or right; doesn't matter as long as corporations are pulling the strings.

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
  7. EU Free Speech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    UK citizens should be happy about brexit now. If they can stay out of the EU they may be able to retain their Freedom of Speech if they ever had it.

    1. Re:EU Free Speech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeaaaah, not so much. They have their own firewalls and bullshit, which are atleast as bad as this suggested shit.

    2. Re:EU Free Speech? by mrbester · · Score: 2

      This would become UK law one day before the official leaving date. No doubt that was intentional.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    3. Re:EU Free Speech? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Interesting

      UK citizens should be happy about brexit now. If they can stay out of the EU they may be able to retain their Freedom of Speech if they ever had it.

      You can find holes in "free speech" for any country or countries (including the US). Nowhere really has "free" speech.

      Sadly, the UK is less free than many when it comes to free speech. I don't think any of us would disagree that racism is a bad thing- but in Britain if you say something racist in public you can be arrested for it. I want racism to die- but I don't approve of arresting people for simply saying something bad- it comes down to a very subjective "what is racist?"

      If you're rich, you can block the nations press from reporting certain embarrassing stories on you. You can ask for a super-injunction which prevents the press from being allowed to report on a story AND they're not even allowed to say you have asked for the super-injunction. A lot of embarrassing news about the royal family that might be published overseas is blocked in the UK.

      TV, video games, etc, are regulary censored. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles had to be released under the name Teenage Mutant "Hero" turtles in the UK because "Ninja" was considered too violent a term for UK children. Songs with explicit lyrics are often blocked from UK airways. Certain pron, such as face-sitting is considered indecent in the UK and is not allowed.

      UK might actually have more freedom of speech had they remained in the EU.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    4. Re:EU Free Speech? by Carrot007 · · Score: 1

      > Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles had to be released under the name Teenage Mutant "Hero" turtles in the UK because "Ninja"

      I know you might have a clue maybe but most people wil limagine you refer to the recent films with that.

      They refer to the 87-96 series.

      You know near 30 year old news.

      --
      +----------------- | What is the question!
    5. Re:EU Free Speech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FACE SITTING! wow, and that sounds like just the thing prince charles would be doing with his wife... very British. monty python wrote a song about it.

    6. Re:EU Free Speech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, noone on slashdot would've confused the two, carry on, your 5 digits are now suspect ...

    7. Re:EU Free Speech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, seriously, we already do NOT have freedom of speech like you USians do and if brexit goes through I'm certain our rights will be even worse.

      We are the most surveiled country in the EU (Cameras EVERYWHERE, esp. in major cities and motorways!).

      And our current prime minister THAT NOBODY VOTED FOR is the one *that tried to push through a law that included backdooring SSL/TLS so that law enforcement could read encrypted things easier*!!!

      I wanted a future like Star Trek NG but from where I'm sitting it looks like we're getting something akin to a cross between 1984 and Idiocracy...

  8. Garr I hate stunts like that by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

    n/t

  9. Interesting conundrum for some by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

    On one hand, this is a great thing, making people aware of the issues with the new proposed law and the way Government (or, in this case, a supra-government Government) can run roughshod on your rights. On the other hand, this is from the "right wing/extremist" current Italian Government, who we're told is all about running roughshod on your rights. Methinks those on the political left in Italy and the EU will have a bit of cognitive dissonance going on...

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  10. The protest should have been more widespread by Voice+of+satan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I agree with them; I think they should have done the same for all EU ip adresses and all languages.

    EU citizens can still act a little: https://saveyourinternet.eu/

    Where i stand, i can donate to the EFF. Which i did. About other laws hurting the American internet.

    1. Re:The protest should have been more widespread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nothing citizens will say or do will change the outcome. The sad fact is that since the Internet wasn't invented and developed in Europe, it must be brought to heel. Europeans think like that. In the preamble to the EU constitution it says that "Europe is the continent that brings civilization to the world". Upon the founding of the European Community, the predecessor of the EU, De Gaulle was widely applauded when he declared that Europe would decide alone the fate of the world. Europeans believe themselves to be ubermensch and look down on everybody else. They are thought in school that Europeans are superior to everyone else, and that all the world must bow to Europe. Those are facts. The EU is a serious danger for the whole world. Underneath that civilized facade, national socialism stirs. They may try to deny that, but that's it. It's not a matter of political spectrum. It's a matter of culture. Europe's Weltanschauung is simple: Europeans must rule, it's their destiny, everybody else must serve them. Beware the Europeans.

    2. Re:The protest should have been more widespread by Voice+of+satan · · Score: 1

      I am replying to my own post but other wikipedia groups have joined the movement. I am not very hopeful but at least our (as netizens) freedoms will not die in total indifference...

  11. Brilliant!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The police aren't doing a good job so let's have fewer officers. The schools are doing a bad job so let's have fewer teachers. Hospitals suck so let's fire half the doctors. Before you know it we'll be living in a libertarian utopia.

    1. Re:Brilliant!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are dumb. Proper enforcement of existing law doesn't mean more regulation to be enforced.

      Your examples amount to "thing not good therefore reduce that thing.".

      The position is: "government expands authority to regulate more things is bad. Therefore we need more government authority to regulate more things."

  12. How fitting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    On July 4th the US celebrates their freedom.

    On July 5th the EU ends ours.

  13. Blocking Fake News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Blocking fake news is good. Real news supports all the new EU copyright laws.

    Works when libtards to it on Facebook so nice to see the fascist pig shit shoe on the other foot. YouTube even censors proof 9-11 was an inside job, like this video:
    https://drive.google.com/open?id=1aRWy25VYXTrv30dZpe_kbS4GdJWYi-7I

  14. Confusing Title? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I first read the title as

    "Wikipedia Italy Blocks All Articles *that are* in Protest of EU's Ruinous Copyright Proposals"

  15. Copyright law is such bullshit now by OrangeTide · · Score: 2

    Now that technology is available to quickly access millions upon millions of database items there is not much need to have an implicit copyright system. An explicit copyright registration system that charges a fee, not unlike Internet domains, is feasible. With that registration it is then easy to reference what is copyrighted and then infer what is not copyrighted with some reasonable assurance.

    On top of that, if we were to completely revamp our copyright laws internationally we should really considered an appropriate shorter duration for copyright. Should you have a monopoly on your own creation in order to support yourself? I don't see why not. But that does not mean creating something that you leave to your great grandchildren as an income source. It is kind of how we ended up with the gilded age and how a lot of "old money" families were built, I think few of us want to return to that era. If you create something, a story, a software library, a film, you never really created it from whole cloth. You were influenced and inspired by the culture and art in your own lifetime.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  16. This is what voting liberal gets you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Insane crazy censorship.

  17. Good Job by Tsolias · · Score: 0

    A day without wikipedia, is a great day.
    If only people can go back to books and stop reading trash.

    I'll borrow a phrase from peter Lloyd
    "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but there will always be something that wikipedia will complain"

  18. The only positive thing... by Herve5 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... may be that this will strongly accelerate migrations from GAFA services to independent, open and untractable systems like Diaspora / Mastodon / Pixelfed etc.
    Initially I thought that only 'slow-throughput' sevices could be dealt with this way, but I even discovered Peertube, a movie service.
    Honestly, at this moment the only final push these guys need is... a big influx of new users pushed away from GAFA by the new EU restrictions :-D

    --
    Herve S.
  19. Re: Federal Prison is coming, Trumpies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why dont you move to England where the words that hurt your feelings are illegal to say? Think about it.

  20. Italian Wikipedia, not Wikipedia Italy by xaosflux · · Score: 2

    it.wikipedia.org is an encyclopedia written in Italian. It is not located in, or only for use in Italy; it is not a Wikipedia about the subject of Italy.

  21. Easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More countries should Brexit.

    Fuck the EU

  22. Zeronet by Voice+of+satan · · Score: 1

    Maybe, one day we will need and immense mobilization to move what we hold dear to zeronet and host it ourselves. Wikipedia included. To shield them from such laws.

    https://zeronet.io/

  23. Re:B-b-b-but Europe is so WONDERFUL!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Italy is the Mexico of Europe. Dirty and filled with obnoxious, brown-skinned, greasy people.

  24. Victory ! by Voice+of+satan · · Score: 1

    The law has not been voted.

    But this is just a reprieve, there will be other attempts.

  25. Re:B-b-b-but Europe is so WONDERFUL!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live in Norway, idiot. In case you don't know what that is, it's one of the richest countries in the world per capita and one of the most expensive places to live.

    You sound like some untravelled American who has never been outside of his country. Italy isn't some fancy, affluent place. In fact compared to where I live, most of it is quite low class.

  26. Re:B-b-b-but Europe is so WONDERFUL!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, that's why Clooney, George Lucas and Madonna chose to own properties in Italy and not in Norway: because they are poor!

    Nobody wants to go to Norway, imbecile! And most school kids couldn't even spot it on a map! Irrelevant history, ugly as fuck, and with an economy that entirely relies on oil. As soon as the transition to renewables is over, your country will simply be bankrupt, just like Qatar or some other tiny petrostates.