Molto Disgusto: Video Brings Italian Wrath Down On Google

Peter Fleischer of GoogleGoogle's global privacy counsel Peter Fleischer and three other executives are expected to appear in court in Milan on Tuesday to face criminal charges stemming from an offensive video uploaded to the company's site.

Fleischer and the other company officials are accused of criminal defamation and failing to control personal data, according to the International Association of Privacy Professionals. The executives face a maximum penalty of three years in jail.

The case stems from a 2006 incident in which a high school student posted a three-minute clip of himself and three others bullying a 17-year-old with Down syndrome. The clip, which went live in September, was taken down Nov. 7, within 24 hours of Google receiving complaints about it.

A Google spokesperson said in a statement that the company intends to "vigorously defend" its employees.

"We feel that bringing this case to court is totally wrong. It's akin to prosecuting mail service employees for hate speech letters sent in the post. What's more, seeking to hold neutral platforms liable for content posted on them is a direct attack on a free, open internet," the company stated.

Italian authorities briefly took Fleischer into custody on Jan. 23, shortly after he delivered a lecture at the University of Milan, according to the International Association of Privacy Professionals, which broke the news Monday afternoon in its newsletter. Fleischer is based in Paris. The law enforcement authorities reportedly had a summons for Fleischer and took him to a prosecutor for a deposition that day.

In the U.S., companies like Google are generally protected from criminal liability for material uploaded by users. But European laws appear to offer weaker protections. In 1997, a German court convicted Compuserve Deutschland head Felix Somm of distributing pornography because customers were able to download child pornography from the service. An appellate court later overturned that finding.

The International Association of Privacy Professionals said that Italy's penal code provides that Internet content providers--including companies like Google--are responsible for material users post online.

Fleischer's arrest appears to mark the first time that a privacy executive has faced criminal charges for alleged privacy violations, said Trevor Hughes, executive director of the International Association of Privacy Professionals. "It's a cautionary tale for anyone in the Internet business," Hughes said, adding that the Google executives who were arrested did not know about the video until it was removed. "The job risk profile just changed considerably," Hughes said.

2 comments about "Molto Disgusto: Video Brings Italian Wrath Down On Google".
Check to receive email when comments are posted.
  1. David Thurman from Aussie Rescue of Illinois, February 4, 2009 at 7:30 a.m.

    Not sure how Google feels they aren't guilty as the law states as such:

    "The International Association of Privacy Professionals said that Italy's penal code provides that Internet content providers--including companies like Google--are responsible for material users post online. "

    Pretty clear as to the ownership. Sadly we have Darrell's that think abusing a Down's child is cool, but Google allowed it to be uploaded. Since Google takes the effort to remove material, they accept the responsibility of that material. If they were to ignore it, ALL THE TIME, then they might have a leg to stand on in the US, but the Italian law seems pretty clear.

    Welcome to censored media. I expect we will start seeing the same limits in our laws in the US, the Fairness Doctrine is just one such law slowly ebbing its way back to country. Change we can count on.

  2. Angela Horn, February 4, 2009 at 9:49 a.m.

    But Google doesn't proactively take offensive videos down, they depend on the community to report, the way many internet communities work. I think if they were to edit user-uploaded material, then they would be taking ownership of the material. If they just delete it in response to user complaints, that's retaining ownership of their own space and asserting some control over who/what uses it.

Next story loading loading..