Italy's Public Prosecutor Orders ISPs To Block Dozens Of 'Pirate' Websites Just Because He Said So
from the wave-that-magic-wand dept
We've already reported on how Italy's communications watchdog, AGCOM, has assigned itself the power to censor websites based on a copyright infringement claim from a copyright holder, without any sort of judicial due process. However, it appears that Italy's public prosecutor has decided to go even further and simply order ISPs to censor dozens of websites based solely on his say so that they were sources of infringing materials. No copyright holder made any specific claim about those sites. There doesn't appear to have been any due process, or really any process at all, other than that the public prosecutor decided which sites were "pirate sites," and then handed them off to the "Guardia di Finanza" (the financial police, more or less), a part of Italy's Ministry of Economy and Finance, who went out and ordered ISPs to block access to these sites entirely.Unfortunately, it looks like this is something of a trend, with law enforcement types suddenly deciding on their own what websites need to be shut down absent any sort of judicial due process. These efforts probably make copyright maximalists happy, but they fly in the face of pretty much all of copyright law. They're almost entirely based on confusing law enforcement types into believing that copyright is just like "property" and thus that it can treat sites that are somehow connected to possible infringement the same as entities that traffic in stolen merchandise. There are, of course, worlds of difference between the two, but copyright maximalists play on the ignorance of law enforcement officials in these settings, playing up the misleading analogy, leading to vast censorship and a near total lack of due process.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Never fails
Why, it's almost as though things aren't as cut and dry as they like to pretend, or that their 'evidence' isn't nearly as strong as they like to claim it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Never fails
They'd better hope to hell this doesn't pass as a standard of evidence, or there'd be a lot of trolls needing to be rounded up for being lying douche pirates...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Never fails
Of course the judges will just have to take their word for it, as for some reason they always seem to object strongly to having their programs tested for accuracy, but I'm sure that's a total coincidence, and has nothing to do with them knowing any independent review would show their IP matching programs to be laughably inaccurate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Never fails... Most would be government parasites
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Something like this completely throws out the idea of 'innocent until proven guilty', and replaces it with 'Guilty because I said so', which is anything but just.
Skipping the whole trial step and going straight to ordering the accused to be punished is both a serious abuse of power(by completely sidestepping the courts like his, he's essentially saying he's more powerful than them), and a pretty strong indication that the evidence, and therefor the case, wouldn't hold up in court, and the person ordering the shutdowns knows it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I simply noted that the article judges what's happening in Italy using the standard of American jurisprudence. What's happening in Italy comports with Italian law. The fact that you (or anyone else) doesn't like it, doesn't mean it is unlawful.
And even in the US, people are arrested and languish in jail; and property is seized. This all occurs without a "trial" first.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Recently, most of what the NSA has been doing is 'legal'(technically... sorta... mostly because they've been fighting like mad to keep any outside, impartial judges from reviewing their actions, and sadly the courts have gone along with them), but other than people unfamiliar with just how extensive their spying is, or authoritorians who feel that those in power can do no wrong, you'd likely be hard pressed to find someone who would argue that what the NSA is doing is right.
Historically, you've got a whole bunch of things that used to be legal, yet which the vast majority of people today wouldn't agree with in the slightest. Little things like racial segregation, prohibiting women from voting, the ban on drinking, freakin' slavery...
Point is, just because something's 'legal', doesn't make it right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Please find someone else to argue with as you are obvious too stupid to understand my point and discuss it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You are found guilty of trolling Techdirt and are now banned. Because I say you are trolling, despite what anyone else may think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Please ask your helper to read this to you slowly and explain fully before you post again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
ITALY DOES IN FACT HAVE A RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS, YOU INCOMPETENT BUFFOON!!!
The point of the article is that the websites were blocked with no trial or court order, just some fool in power yelling "PIRACY!!!" at the top of his lungs. This shouldn't be going on anywhere, not the US, not Italy. Judging by the fact you so vehemently right for this, you seem to be against the right to due process, so again, I judge you a troll and ban you. Respect your ban this time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Your due process comes after the seizure.
The point of the article was to whip up unthinking dolts like yourself into a lather by "revealing" some new and nefarious threat to freeloading. Now, please return to your seat on the short bus for the journey home.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Because I fucking feel like it and there's no law against it. How's that?
I'm pretty sure if you actually did have a reason, it would be returned or you could sue for it.
I assume there's redress under Italian law for the website owners as well in the event that the content they're monetizing is lawfully theirs. As you noted, they have due process in Italy.
Weren't you just arguing that Italy's laws are different then the US, but now you are using the US as an example?
Yes. In order to amplify the point that even in a country with a strong tradition of due process, you don't get a hearing before you're arrested or property is seized.
Also, was there even probable cause to take them down? We have that in the US too, but you may not have it in Italy.
I think its as easy to infer whether material on a website is infringing as it is to correctly deduce that money on the back seat of a car was derived from illegal drug sales.
If you have that much money in cash, it is very likely you are breaking the law, likely drugs.
If you have "12 Years A Slave" and "Gravity" on your shitty little website you are likely infringing.
You're still banned, troll, and you're running out of ammo too.
Please bitch. You can't even hold up your side of the debate. What not stick with something you're good at.... like fellatio?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
By the way, if I can't hold up my side of the debate, then why are you the one swearing? Very unprofessional.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
this gestapo wannanbe
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cencorship
[ link to this | view in chronology ]