![Google Google](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/google_64.png)
![Government Government](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/government_64.png)
![Television Television](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/tv_64.png)
![Youtube Youtube](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/youtube_64.png)
![News News](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/news_64.png)
![Your Rights Online Your Rights Online](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/yro_64.png)
YouTube Legally Considered a TV Station In Italy 254
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."
Pretty much completely infeasible. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Pretty much completely infeasible. (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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Pretty much completely infeasible. (Score:4, Insightful)
Here's to hoping!
Re: (Score:2)
Why would Youtube block Italy? They probably have very little interest in complying with Italian law.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If they want to operate in the EU they need to abide by EU law
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Pretty much completely infeasible. (Score:4, 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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How about drawing the line at 1% ownership and/or 1% control (since some stock classes may give more votes than others, but still have equal ownership in the company). 1% is also not entirely arbitrary, IIRC that figure is used in some law or regulation regarding having a "significant interest" in a company. It is a high enough figure that regular retirement investing will not cause a problem, but yet it also excludes owning enough of a company to make abusing political power seem worthwhile.
Re: (Score:2)
I would suggest obligating them to have any and all holdings in a blind trust. [opensecrets.org] That's actually almost a de facto requirement in the US right now, in order to comply with disclosure rules [house.gov].
David Eddings suggested this. (Score:2, Insightful)
David Eddings suggested the ultimate version of this in the Tamuli series in the Second Chapter of 'The Shining Ones'
On the Tegan government:
'Our elected officials have no outside interests. As soon as they're elected, everything they own is sold, and the money's put into the national treasury. If the economy prospers during their term in office, their wealth earns them a profit. If the economy collapses, they lose everything'
'That's absurd. No government ever makes a profit.
'Ours does,' she said smugly, 'a
Re: (Score:3)
Thus giving politicians even more incentive to not give a fuck about what happens to the country after they leave office. You'd end up with the same short sighted policies that have large corporations hollowing themselves out to make the quarterly profits.
A leader would have to be truly selfless to invest his money in say a large hydroelectric scheme that will not start to earn money for 15 years. And he has a massiv
Re: (Score:2)
In the UK they (at least the most important ones) put the money in a blind trust for the duration of their time in officce, which means that they no longer control it and do not know where it is invested.
That does not solve the problem for people like Burlosconi, but it does for most people.
Re: (Score:3)
There is no such rule. Politicians will generally sell their interest in companies or industries that might present a conflict of interest with their job, but if all they own are widely diversified mutual funds, about the only possible interest they would have is to ensure that the economy continues to improve, and you're unlikely to find ANY American who's against that stance.
-Restil
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"taking the th mayorship"? He's the mayor of Thailand now?
Re: (Score:2)
They don't. It's the voters who permit that. It was always known that the guy owns most of Italy's media - people still voted for him.
Re:Pretty much completely infeasible. (Score:4, 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.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the idea isn't to block just YouTube from Italy...block Italy from accessing ANY Google content. I bet the people of Italy need Google more than Google needs them.
Re: (Score:2)
I bet the people of Italy need Google more than Google needs them.
I'm not so sure about that. Italy is a pretty big market, and Italy survived perfectly fine before Google. It wouldn't surprise me if Berlusconi would love to get the opportunity to create an official Italian search engine under his control.
Re: (Score:2)
And to help everyone in Italy, Google needs to have the proper address, phone, fax and email information for Berlusconi displayed on the same explanation page. He works in politics, those informations are not private, quite the contrary.
Re:Pretty much completely infeasible. (Score:4, Insightful)
And any italian citizen sending a message to Berlusconi will get a "visit in the night" just like any other Berlusconi opposers receive.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't be a king if you kill all your subjects.
If all he wants is a cadre of sycophants he can do that quite easily by just being extremely rich. No need to go to the trouble of playing politics and actually getting elected to an office.
Re: (Score:3)
That way he'd still be subject to the law. But with his control over the media, it's pretty easy for him to get elected, and then he can change the laws to make himself immune to prosecution, and increase his hold on the media while he's at it (which is what this particular issue is about).
Sure, he could be satisfied with just being rich, but clearly he prefer to use his wealth to buy power, and then demonstrate his power by showing how he's above the law and not like any of us mortals.
Re: (Score:2)
I know, exactly!
It is just a web site. Just like Slashdot. Is this sitegoing to be considered a TV station? Are they going to try and foolishly enforce those laws on us as well?
I never understand how it is that anyone - be it in Law or in Politics or anywhere - has trouble making the distinction between what YouTube is and a TV Station.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure that's exactly what Google will do if this law takes effect.
Take that Italy (Score:5, Funny)
In America, Dominos is legally considered pizza.
Re:Take that Italy (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe, but you better be careful. If one Dominos restaurant ever goes down, they will all follow very quickly.
Re:Take that Italy (Score:5, Insightful)
If YouTube is an Italian TV Station, where are the breasts?
Re: (Score:2)
Wow (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??
Re: (Score:2)
GeoLocation of IP to work out the appropriate timezone perhaps?
Re: (Score:2)
After enough congresspeople (or whatever they're called in Italy) get tired of hearing people complaining that Youtube is blocked, the law gets repealed.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Italy will enforce it with fines, and raids on server farms and offices within Italy, and lawsuits and criminal prosecutions. How Youtube abides by its new obligations is up to them. It's not Italy's problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Google, Inc. has an office in Milan. [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Not that I've RTFA, but don't take it for granted that Google can be held responsible for YouTube's actions, especially given the complex web of companies used by an organisation that size. In any case, how hard would it really be for Google to pack up their Milan office?
Re: (Score:2)
Hard enough - they sell advertising and the Italian market is a nice source of income. They could do without it, but they won't want to lose it if they can somehow avoid it. It's certainly worth their time to find a way to work with these regulations, and looking at their history - that's likely what they are going to do. Just like they found a way to limit streetview in Germany (even though there was no legal requirement, a
Re: (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.
Re:TV (Score:4, Funny)
Sudo Youtube is a TV Station.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I just visited youtube.com and saw the following
<title>YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.</title>
Re: (Score:2)
I just visited youtube.com and saw the following
<title>YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.</title>
OK. 255.255.255.255
Look Ma! I'm on Television!
This is what happens... (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.
Re: (Score:2)
Control the people, and you *keep* control of the media.
But let's see what happens when youtube starts banning Italy.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's see what happens when *Google* starts banning Italy.
Re: (Score:2)
Your search - Italy - did not match any documents.
Did you mean: Italic?
Re: (Score:2)
Dylan Moran on Berlusconi (appropriately hosted on YouTube):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajrw7uXfKRI [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
In Parliamentary Italy the President owns the media, but in America the media owns the President!
Re: (Score:2)
No, the problem is that Youtube is considered television in Italy, because it's a website that serves content on request, rather than a streaming feed that users choose to access based on what's being served. This means attempting to institute infrastructure to classify and rate videos, and then only allow access to videos inside certain hours. That's a pretty disturbing idea. I'm already annoyed at region-locked videos. Time-locked based on content is asinine.
Corrections? (Score:2)
Call it (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
You overestimate the Italian people's need for Youtube, and underestimate Berlusconi's need to keep a media monopoly going.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You underestimate how much people rely on *all* of Google's services. He said "Google." Not "Youtube." Blogger, youtube, gmail, the search engine. It. All. Goes. Away. And you know what? I'd love to see it happen. It'd be one of the most fascinating events to happen in my lifetime.
Re: (Score:2)
See, this is where I think Google should call Berlusconi's bluff. ....
So what you are saying is that Google now has the power to bring down a democratically elected government? That is scary. (and yes I said that with tongue firmly planted in cheek with respect to Italy)
Re: (Score:2)
No, I don't think he was suggesting that YouTube could take down the government. I think he was suggesting that blocking Italians from YouTube could cause complaints that could force a review of the policies.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I don't think he was suggesting that YouTube could take down the government. I think he was suggesting that blocking Italians from YouTube could cause complaints that could force a review of the policies.
Which is tantamount to Google effectively triggering a no-confidence vote by the populace. Sure it would only be a minor hiccup in a very stable democracy, but in the case of Italy such an action could result in the government crashing down. Governments have been taken down for less, but typically it has been an internal source that has triggered the action. Given the persuasiveness of the Internet it could be possible for a company the size of Google to isolate a country. Yes I know that there are othe
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Which is tantamount to Google effectively triggering a no-confidence vote by the populace.
No it isn't. Whining != Insurrection. Response to whining != capitulation.
Sure it would only be a minor hiccup in a very stable democracy, but in the case of Italy such an action could result in the government crashing down.
Berlusconi is the longest serving head of state of any of the G8, fer chrissakes.
Given the persuasiveness of the Internet it could be possible for a company the size of Google to isolate a country.
The internet doesn't have any inherent persuasiveness. Not any more than radio waves.
Re:Call it (Score:5, 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.
Re:Call it (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure. I thought that they both got what they wanted out of the deal , a ton of good press and free publicity.
Re:Call it (Score:4, 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.
Re: (Score:2)
Italy is part of Europe, which is already blocked from what seems like every other video.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
At what point does it become okay for a company to try to bring down a government?
I'd say that it's about the point where the government allows itself to become a pawn to another corporation. At that point, what else are you supposed to do?
Indeed (Score:2)
Businesses with contrary interests do sometimes crop up as a heavy counterweight to the bad behavior of another business, practically speaking.
YouTube will have the last laugh (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Google should one-up Berlusconi & block Italian IPs throughout all it's servers.
Hey look, a loophole... (Score:4, 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
Re: (Score:2)
"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
Won't work. Some *AA shill will upload kiddie porn, then someone else reports it.
Now, does YouTube breach the "no editorial control" loophole or get taken offline for knowingly distributing child porn?
The loophole doesn't exist because there is no such thing as "absolutely no editorial control" so long as absolute freedom of speech (however heinous it may be) is disallowed.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I don't think that would work. I think that if they knowingly take off *all* editorial, but have full log retention of uploads, and fully comply with law enforcement, then they're fine.
Google will do what it did in Korea (Score:5, Interesting)
Why would any other country help enforce this? (Score:5, 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.
Re: (Score:2)
Impossible. Murdoch is now an American national, so wouldn't be eligible for election to our parliament. A more likely scenario would be the USA repealing laws so foreign born citizens could become President. Rupert is nearly 80 but Arnie would most certainly be the next Republican candidate.
New income though? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
According to Wikipedia, Berlusconi first became prime minister in 1994.
It bottles the mind how ridiculous his rule is. The guy personally owns large parts of the media in the country and gets laws passed to keep him out of trouble. The part about controversies in the Wikipedia article about him is tl;dr...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi#Controversies [wikipedia.org]
Re:When did Italy turn into (Score:5, Funny)
Re:When did Italy turn into (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, 16 years. 16 years is way too long for an upper leadership role in any supposedly democratic country.
Re: (Score:2)
He's been in and out. Although his current tenure is probably a post-WWII record-breaker for Italy, which has gone through a lot of unstable coalitions.
Re: (Score:2)
Surprisingly, his coalitions do tend to be more stable than those of the opposition. He probably has his ways to keep everybody in line.
Re: (Score:2)
What I don't understand is how that guy is still in power, given that Italy is a democracy. If you look at his record as a politician, there's practically nothing positive there, and more negativity than all other European heads of state combined.
Re: (Score:2)
It's easy to explain: he controls the media. He can make himself look good and his opposition look bad. The fact that his coalitions tend to be more stable also helps, I'm sure.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
In 1946.
(it was a banana kingdom before that)
Re: (Score:2)
"In 1946.
(it was a banana kingdom before that)"
Bananas is right. "Before that" isn't right as it still is "bananas".
49 BC (Score:2, Funny)
When Caesar crossed the Rubicon.
Re: (Score:2)
When Berlusconi was first elected as Prime Minister, in 1994. Apparently you haven't been reading the news.
Yeah, right. There was no corruption in Italy prior to 1994.
Re: (Score:2)
Italy has always been corrupt, but Berlusconi took it to entirely new levels.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless that guy owns all the companies which made the products you listed, you will only punish Italian companies and Italian workers because of one clueless politician.
Re: (Score:3)
And who voted that clueless politician in again?
Re: (Score:2)
Who votes for the prime minister?
Re: (Score:2)
And to make the joke complete, make sure someone gets that on video and then upload it to YouTube.
Re: (Score:2)
So are you a US citizen? Just curious.
Re: (Score:2)