Google on trial in Italy

Correction at 11:24 a.m. PST: This post initially misstated the length of the cell phone video at the center of the lawsuit. It was a 191-second video.

Four executives from Google are about to face criminal charges in Italy regarding alleged privacy violations.

The lawsuit, noted by The New York Times' Saul Hansell and the International Association of Privacy Professionals, revolves around a 191-second cell phone video in 2006. In the video, four high school kids tease a boy with Down Syndrome. The video was uploaded to Google's Italian site and quickly removed from the site after complaints.

The executives--David Drummond, Google's chief legal officer; George Reyes, former CFO; Peter Fleischer, global privacy counsel; and an unnamed employee--face charges as prosecutors argue that the video shouldn't have been published.

Should Google have to get consent from a subject before a video is uploaded? Aside from the fact that Google would have an impossible task, I reckon Italy has more important matters to worry about--like debt that's more than 100 percent of GDP.

According to the IAPP's Tracey Bentley:

It is believed to be the first criminal sanction ever pursued against a privacy professional for his company's actions.

Bentley also outlines some of the case details:

Milan public prosecutor Francesco Cajani decided that by allowing the 191-second clip onto its site, Google executives were in breach of Italian penal code.

Peter Fleischer was on his way into the University of Milan for a speaking engagement January 23, 2008 when five law enforcement officials with summonses surrounded him. According to Fleischer, the officers had been waiting for him, but ultimately allowed him to deliver his talk before taking him to a deposition before the public prosecutor.

Cajani is prosecuting Google as an Internet content provider. Unlike Internet service providers, Italian penal code states that Internet content providers are responsible for the third-party content posted to their sites. This is essentially the same law regulating newspaper and television publishers.

Google thinks this prosecutor--Cajani is now a global name--has overstepped.

The trial will go on for months.

[ddhboy]

Way to go. Next step, google bans IPs sourcing from Italy to avoid criminal charges, and I'd assume that a few other sites would follow suit.

[08Rabbit]

"Google thinks this prosecutor--Cajani is now a global name--has overstepped."

He really has.

Another politico looking for a pay day. The fact that he could hurt the net users in his jurisdiction means nothing to him. When the global netters and their government officials from other places talk sense to him, maybe he'll back down. If not, good riddance. We created the internet (USA). Don't want to play? Go home and make pasta.

[pentest]

Americans surely didn't invent the Web, which is what Google relies on.

Of course, Google is responsible to obey the laws of every country they do business in. If they don't want to play by the host nations rules, than Google can go home and spy on you instead.

[Hunnter2k3]

I read this earlier and.. my brain cried at how stupid these people truly are.

I hope they get laughed at in court, i really do.

[xylyx3d]

eh, it's just Italy, let 'em be dumb a$$es. who cares if Italians can't use Google? if the Italians care then it's their problem to fix, not ours to worry about.

[jtara]

Over-stepped? Perhaps over-dramatic, but I'm not so sure he's over-stepped.

The Italian law is what it is. You don't like it? Don't operate in Italy. If the law is, in fact, so Draconian that it renders the Internet useless to Italians, they are likely to change the law.

Google, I think, has arrogantly played fast-and-loose with legal requirements in ALL of the countries in which it operates - including the U.S., primarily in the area of intellectual property. It is true that the law needs a post-Internet update. Google just does pretty much whatever it wants, and U.S. officials look the other way because of the supposed damage to the public of holding Google to the (perhaps obsolescent) law.

The law works differently in Italy, and any company operating there needs to respect that. Under Italian law, Google is acting as a publisher of these uploaded videos. (Note that we are NOT talking about search results here.) The law holds Google as responsible for that content as it does a newspaper or magazine. The cost to check all uploaded content for conformance with Italian law may in fact be high or prohibitive. So be it. If that is the case, then Google should make an economic decision to not offer that service in Italy. Simple as that. They certainly can lobby the Italian government to change the law.

It's difficult and expensive to operate internationally. There are wide differences in laws, and in most types of businesses, there are markets that you simply cannot serve because of regulation or the cost of conforming to regulation. Google seems to have found a solution to this difficulty and expense - simply ignore the law!

[RHx2]

Googles is supposed to 'do no evil'? And these people commenting think this fine, to torment a child with Down Syndrome and put it up for the world to see? Google is an international company as long as they provide and take money from other countries. Just because the US refuses to hold any one that 'does evil' accountable on the WWW, doesn't mean that other countries are so backward in regards to at the very least: Children, disabled peoples, etc. If you put a product out there, you must take resposibility for it . Google had no problem giving up 2 young men in China that were expressing their views on their own government in a nonviolent way. The Chinese government were told who they were and where they were so that Google could continue to do business in that country. The young men were arrested and charged with treason. I can't believe that the people on here are so ignortant as to call an entire national of people stupid, that with out those people the technology that your using today would not exisist.

[clem_cowsie]

The very existence of that video clip is wrong.
I mean, it's logical that people would sue Google for something like that, although it wouldn't be something that I would do or agree with, but why are people not doing anything about the bullies and the person who took the video? More accurately, why has this blogger not said anything about steps being taken to help the victim and to reprimand the bullies and video-taker?
If things are being done for the children in the video, then we are forced to conclude that this blog entry is - gasp - SLOPPY, or if you prefer, NOT THOROUGH ENOUGH. I don't think that anyone who's posted a comment so far hasn't thought about the bullies' and the video-taker's consequences.
If things aren't being done after all, then my apologies to the blogger and I will instead divert the above comments to the people involved in this.

[Nataku4ca]

O WELLLLLL..... 2 extremes in opinion... This is mine...

Google at least tried to sanitize it's stuff, they took it down as soon as it was discovered. And yes the clip should never have existed, but jesus christ people, google wasn't the one that made the video and i dont know of any law that allows google to track the ass-holes who made it. May be make a law so google can do something about it?

I would bash google if they had left it there with out even bothering to take it down. If everything that goes on the net needs to be reviewed before displayed I don't think there would be so many people putting stuff up on the net in the beginning.

Granted, things needs to be put under a bit more control but how much is enough? Should this get to the point of what china is doing? do you really want google to conform to china's ways on all other countries and display only stuff the gov want you to see? I'm not saying this situation is, but how far will this go?

A new set of rules are needed for the net, and we need one that all countries can agree on. There isn't really a boundary for the net so ya I dont want to see everyone going china's way for firewalling stuff, its pretty much death to truth and freedom(some control are still ok)

[CyR00k]

If you are in a public place you have no expectation of privacy. If you did you could sue every single retail and restaurant for violating your privacy by having video cameras monitoring the store. If a newspaper or magazine ran a story with photos they would be sued for violating the privacy of the people in the photos. Photographers, the press as well as businesses have rights and when you are in public you are monitored and by law they have the right to photograph and video tape. Look at paparazzi they are a great example of people not having privacy in public (this includes your garbage at your curb).

On a second note, people being sued for libel/slander for pointing out harassment or bad service and the companies that host the comments being sued as accessories and violations of privacy is absolutely idiotic. If you did something to harass someone and were caught doing it, guess what you are guilty of harassment you don't get to say that the other person is demeaning your character by honestly reporting their experience of you. The cell phone photographer and Google should be applauded for subjecting the teens, who were obviously guilty of harassment, to public ridicule and scorn.

[bizhokie]

"I reckon Italy has more important matters to worry about--like debt that's more than 100 percent of GDP. "

Am I missing something here? Our 25 trillion dollar debt here in the US is a whole lot higher than 100% of our GDP and that doesn't seem to be worrying anyone.