On Wednesday, a Milan court convicted three Google executives to suspended six-month sentences for violating the privacy of an autistic boy. (The three, and a fourth Google employee, were acquitted on a concurrent criminal defamation charge.) In September 2006 the boy was bullied by four schoolmates, and a recording of the episode was uploaded to Google Video. The footage was promptly removed from the server, as soon as a user flagged it as offensive and the Police issued a take-down request, some two months later.
The ruling called for heated reactions from all over the world. And rightly so, as far as we can tell (the judge reserved up to 90 days for releasing his motivations). Google’s staff were not aware of the video until the request came in, and they certainly didn’t play a role in recording or uploading it. In other words, they’re being held responsible for someone else’s actions.
Although the verdict involves some technicalities related with Italy’s privacy law, it raises very important questions about the liability of internet service providers. EU’s E-commerce Directive provides a safe harbor for hosting, caching and mere conduit services, much like Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in the US–although the latter might in fact have a wider scope.
Yet, the decision might be a relevant precedent. It is important to understand that this is not only about Google–and not only about Italy. Similar legal cases took place in other countries, involving companies such as Ebay or Yahoo. Not surprisingly, providers are now trying to cope with uncertainty in the only available way: through censorship. Wordpress, just to name an example, has been reported with deleting blog posts or entire blogs for allegedly defamatory comments.
As Jeff Jarvis writes: «in the global, interconnected web, we live in constant danger of the lowest common denominator, of one court, legislature, or regime opening up liability that affects risk and behavior everywhere». The pressure towards a stricter responsibility for internet operators is certainly growing among politicians worldwide. A draft of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement that has been under discussion for the last two years was leaked last week, and ISP liability for illegal content is part of it.
The trend we are facing is clearly putting at risk the future of the internet as we know it. User generated content, the key element of the so-called web 2.0, requires that the infrastructure stay free. This is not to say, as critics seem to fear, that the internet should be an anomic nightmare. Rules exist in real life and apply just as easily to the web. Instead of asking for an ever increasing liability, we should give responsibility where responsibility is due.
Every week we bring you in-depth interviews with leading thinkers and entrepreneurs from the world of technology. The most recent episode features 