Google bosses convicted in Italy

[Mahone]

BBC News - Google bosses convicted in Italy

Yet another bad decision made by a judge due to a complete lack of understanding of how the internet works and why these things are almost impossible to prevent. It's actually scary what kind of a precedent this may have. What is it that he would have them do to prevent this in future?

[Dravin]

Am I the only one who wishes there was just some way to simply unplug Italy from the internet until they cry uncle?

[gabelpa]

Am I the only one who wishes there was just some way to simply unplug Italy from the internet until they cry uncle?

There is, we just need a couple malware writers to get their botnets to take Italy's ISP's offline. Not legal, but possible.

[Mahone]

There is, we just need a couple malware writers to get their botnets to take Italy's ISP's offline. Not legal, but possible.

Lol, would it be illegal though either? It depends where the attack originated from. If it came from out in the sticks of Afghanistan, I'm not sure what Italy could legally do about it

Alternatively, the various countries who provide the intercontinental link(s) to Italy could agree to simply disconnect them (yeah, like this would ever happen lol).

[Wingnut]

BBC News - Google bosses convicted in Italy

Yet another bad decision made by a judge due to a complete lack of understanding of how the internet works and why these things are almost impossible to prevent. It's actually scary what kind of a precedent this may have. What is it that he would have them do to prevent this in future?

I'm not aware of other incidents involving Italy, but this is ridiculous. Do they seriously think it's the least bit plausible for Google to survey every single thing posted on Google video or YouTube before it's made publicly available? I can't imagine that it's even possible to quantify the number of uploads on either site, since by the time a count has been made, more have already been uploaded.

From the article:

Prosecutors argued that Google broke Italian privacy law by not seeking the consent of all the parties involved before allowing it to go online.

It's been awhile since I've uploaded anything to YouTube, and never to Google Video, but isn't there something that you have to check off (like posting pictures on Facebook) to the effect of the user having the right to post the video and that it's not offensive, and blah blah blah? "Offensive" is a subjective word, but part of that disclaimer to to take responsibility and liability off of the site, and put it onto the users. The Italian prosecutors should have gone after the user that posted the video. The only reason Google should be involved would be to provide information in the user's profile, if they'd even be willing to do that.

Finally, Google is a US-based company. Other countries may support and encourage censorship, but the US doesn't. YouTube even allows the upload of sexually explicit videos, the viewing of which is available to those 18 and older (or those claiming to be 18 and older).

[Mahone]

I'm not aware of other incidents involving Italy, but this is ridiculous. Do they seriously think it's the least bit plausible for Google to survey every single thing posted on Google video or YouTube before it's made publicly available? I can't imagine that it's even possible to quantify the number of uploads on either site, since by the time a count has been made, more have already been uploaded.

This I agree with. Youtube has to be the most bandwidth intensive site on the internet. There are millions of videos uploaded on a daily basis from all over the globe, and even despite its popularity, google have struggled to make a profit from it. It costs an unbelievable amount of money to run youtube, due to the nature of the site. There is no way google would accept paying operators to verify each video before being made public.

It's been awhile since I've uploaded anything to YouTube, and never to Google Video, but isn't there something that you have to check off (like posting pictures on Facebook) to the effect of the user having the right to post the video and that it's not offensive, and blah blah blah? "Offensive" is a subjective word, but part of that disclaimer to to take responsibility and liability off of the site, and put it onto the users. The Italian prosecutors should have gone after the user that posted the video. The only reason Google should be involved would be to provide information in the user's profile, if they'd even be willing to do that.

Something I see all too often is an assumption that because the law works that way in the USA, it works that way worldwide, which is rarely (if ever) the case. The law in the USA may accept that because the person who uploaded the video gave their word that it obeyed the terms and conditions, it then becomes that persons responsibility. I doubt very much this applies in Italy, as otherwise they could not have been prosecuted.

Finally, Google is a US-based company. Other countries may support and encourage censorship, but the US doesn't. YouTube even allows the upload of sexually explicit videos, the viewing of which is available to those 18 and older (or those claiming to be 18 and older).

Unfortunately irrelevant. If a company has any business going on in a country, it usually has to register as a business in that country. As google has business going on in most countries, it will no doubt be registered as a business in most countries including Italy. Therefore, as they are a registered company in Italy, any operations carried out in Italy have to obey Italian law, regardless of where their headquarters are.

[cassiebea]

This opens up a can of worms! Wow, what a mess!

[Moksha]

Am I the only one who wishes there was just some way to simply unplug Italy from the internet until they cry uncle?

The judge doesn't speak for Italy the same as the site owner does not speak for the video. Holding the wrong party guilty is what prompted this ruling.

[boyando]

Peoples, let us not lose focus. One call to the "family" over in Italy and pod-a-bing pod-a-boom, no problem.

Google, there will be no fee for the service that I am about to perform for you. All I ask, is that some day I may come to you asking for a favor. I think that you can see that this is an offer you can not refuse.

Jimmy "the milk toast" Romano (aka boyando)

[Mahone]

The judge doesn't speak for Italy the same as the site owner does not speak for the video. Holding the wrong party guilty is what prompted this ruling.

Hmm, not sure about that. The judge is most likely employed by the government, so therefore is actions are on behalf of their government. That to me means he speaks for Italy. Of course the media attention may make them reverse the decison, but an Italian official still made the decision in the first place.