Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

French Court Orders Google To Block Pictures of Ex-F1 Chief Mosley

timothy posted about a year ago | from the just-a-little-nazi-themed-orgy-your-honor dept.

Censorship 180

Virtucon writes "This one goes to the old adage 'closing the stable door after the horse bolted.' A French court on Wednesday ruled that Google must remove from its search results photos of a former Formula One racing chief, Max Mosley, participating in an Nazi-themed orgy. Google could be fined up to 1,000 Euros/day for not complying. What's strange here is that Mosley A) Sued in a French Court B) Didn't go after anybody else other than Google and C) has definitely strange tastes in extracurricular activities. In this day and age it's laughable to think that once your private photos/videos hit the Internet that you have any expectation of reining them in or filtering the embarrassing parts out. Google isn't the only game in town so to speak in terms of Internet search. I wonder if his lawyers checked out Yahoo or WebCrawler?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Wasn't this on Top Gear years ago? (2)

Kid Zero (4866) | about a year ago | (#45357807)

I mean, they did spend a few episodes beating the poor joke to death.

Nazi themed orgy? (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45358603)

Link or it didn't happen

Why is he special? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45357815)

Why does he get special privacy?

Re:Why is he special? (5, Funny)

immaterial (1520413) | about a year ago | (#45357851)

Hey, he managed to Godwin the Streisand Effect (or is it the other way around?). He's definitely special.

Re:Why is he special? (5, Informative)

michelcolman (1208008) | about a year ago | (#45357907)

Yep, I never would have even thought of looking for it until I read about the lawsuit. Now of course I just had to see it. Not hard to find, by the way: here [liveleak.com]

Re:Why is he special? (1, Funny)

CauseBy (3029989) | about a year ago | (#45358723)

Lame. I've seen hotter videos on my mom's Facebook feed.

Re:Why is he special? (4, Funny)

dyingtolive (1393037) | about a year ago | (#45358961)

Interesting, I've been in hotter videos on your mom's Facebook feed.

Re:Why is he special? (5, Funny)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#45357921)

It's better! He Rule 34'd the Godwin of the Streisand effect! (or something like that).

Re:Why is he special? (1)

gabereiser (1662967) | about a year ago | (#45358067)

I was just thinking the same thing. By all this media attention on the fact he wants to remove those photos, he's essentially creating the Streisand effect. I wouldn't be surprised if my this time next week there's 10000x more references to those photo's online.

Re:Why is he special? (2)

PvtVoid (1252388) | about a year ago | (#45358343)

It's better! He Rule 34'd the Godwin of the Streisand effect! (or something like that).

You win the internet.

Re:Why is he special? (1)

Rob the Bold (788862) | about a year ago | (#45359075)

It's better! He Rule 34'd the Godwin of the Streisand effect! (or something like that).

You win the internet.

He's still got to fill out form 27b/6 to claim his prize . . .

Yeah we call that a Hat Trick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358413)

What's going on at Mos Eisley?

Re:Why is he special? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#45358335)

and this is old stuff too.
people had already started to forget it and remember him just for ruining f1.. actually that might be a good reason for him to invoke streisand effect.

Re:Why is he special? (3, Funny)

c (8461) | about a year ago | (#45358711)

Hey, he managed to Godwin the Streisand Effect

I believe it's called "pulling a Mosley". Or if it wasn't, it is now.

Re:Why is he special? (1)

slapys (993739) | about a year ago | (#45358761)

Classic Schmosley.

Re:Why is he special? (1)

erikkemperman (252014) | about a year ago | (#45357899)

Why does he get special privacy?

Don't worry, he won't. Streissand effect will make sure if that.

But, although I hate to defend this guy (obviously a first class ahole)... If he weren't famous for other reasons than this odd nazi fetish, these images would have never received as much attention.

Re:Why is he special? (-1, Troll)

larry bagina (561269) | about a year ago | (#45358109)

For the record, the pictures are available here [lemonparty.org] . They were infamous long before anyone knew it was this Mosley guy (he's nobody to me).

Re:Why is he special? (4, Interesting)

shadowknot (853491) | about a year ago | (#45358119)

It also doesn't help his case that he's the son of a noted British fascist leader [wikipedia.org] . Dressing up like a Nazi to get your rocks off when your dad was a Mussolini-loving totalitarian probably isn't a good idea, no matter how much hush money you think you can put up to keep it quiet. Interesting though that the FIA is based in France, I wonder if the courts had any incentive to rule in his favor eh?

Re:Why is he special? (1)

shippo (166521) | about a year ago | (#45358783)

Find a copy of the front page of the News Of The World that made the original allegations, and look at the first three words of the sentence printed at the bottom of the page. Then look into his aunt Unity's movements during the year before he was born. More than a co-incidence?

Fine. (4, Funny)

NettiWelho (1147351) | about a year ago | (#45357819)

Google should just serve a static page to french addresses explaining who's demanding cessation of services. Problem solved.

Re:Fine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45357925)

Without clarification from the French government, that may be their only remedy.

Re: Fine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358275)

Google not in France Not obligated to do shit for the Frogs Court orders, Just ignore them.

Re: Fine. (1)

Calydor (739835) | about a year ago | (#45358429)

That's not how international companies work.

Re: Fine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358923)

They aren't as successful either.

Re: Fine. (1, Flamebait)

NettiWelho (1147351) | about a year ago | (#45358439)

Google not in France Not obligated to do shit for the Frogs Court orders, Just ignore them.

Google Paris
8 Rue de Londres
75009 Paris
France
Phone: +33 (0)1 42 68 53 00
Fax: +33 (0) 1 42 68 53 01

http://www.google.com/about/company/facts/locations/ [google.com]

Re: Fine. (1)

Skapare (16644) | about a year ago | (#45358633)

So do it for IP address blocks allocated to France, and for IPs that have .fr RDNS.

Re: Fine. (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year ago | (#45358807)

Why should Google be doing RDNS queries on every request?

Re: Fine. (1)

Adrian Lopez (2615) | about a year ago | (#45358527)

Google not in France Not obligated to do shit for the Frogs Court orders, Just ignore them.

Google does have a French subsidiary, which places them under French jurisdiction. A bigger problem is the fact that Google has been ordered to block the images worldwide. Whether France has the authority to do that or not, I have no idea.

Re: Fine. (1)

0123456 (636235) | about a year ago | (#45358639)

Whether France has the authority to do that or not, I have no idea.

Of course it doesn't. But if Google want to continue doing business there, they may have to comply.

This kind of nonsense is why few sane companies would want a presence in France.

Re: Fine. (0)

Meeni (1815694) | about a year ago | (#45359041)

This kind of nonsense is prevalent in every country (the us is certainly not the last in this type of behavior). As a matter of fact, have you read the court order, because I would be surprised that a French court would not be careful about jurisdictional extent of the order.

And also, almost all companies have a French subsidiary, and France is receiving more investment money than most other OECD countries. But keep enjoying your misconceptions, "there is no such word as entrepreneur in French" and all that.

Re: Fine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358893)

They showed up in court didn't they? To me it implies they have offices there.

Re:Fine. (1)

Drethon (1445051) | about a year ago | (#45358069)

And a link to other sites that have not received the court order? May not help Google out but it would be amusing.

Re:Fine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358135)

They could also remove all pages containing the name "Max Mosley" from all search results everywhere forever. Better safe than sorry!

Re:Fine. (5, Funny)

Tx (96709) | about a year ago | (#45358219)

Nah. Google should just redirect French users to Bing if they search for Max Mosley pics.

Re:Fine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358371)

this is what you get for doing business in france, no presence no problem

Google should just drop France (0)

kawabago (551139) | about a year ago | (#45358637)

Who would miss France if it never showed up in any google search?

Re:Google should just drop France (0)

Meeni (1815694) | about a year ago | (#45359055)

Sure, Google should just drop the 4th largest market in the world, sounds reasonable.

How many times do I have to tell you guys (3, Funny)

mewsenews (251487) | about a year ago | (#45357825)

What happens at the nazi themed BDSM orgy stays at the nazi themed BDSM orgy!!!

Re:How many times do I have to tell you guys (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45357955)

Ve have vays of making you keep quiet!

Re:How many times do I have to tell you guys (5, Funny)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about a year ago | (#45358625)

What happens at the nazi themed BDSM orgy stays at the nazi themed BDSM orgy!!!

One would think, but sooner of later it's going to spread to Poland, France...

why he chose France (4, Insightful)

Titus Groan (2834723) | about a year ago | (#45357845)

because the french have very tight privacy laws - they have rather strict photography laws too, you don't even get freedom of panorama in France. I sued there because he could win there.

Re:why he chose France (4, Funny)

idontgno (624372) | about a year ago | (#45357911)

I sued there because he could win there.

Welcome to Slashdot, Mr. Mosely.

I'd like to introduce you to a couple of our friends here: Barbra Streisand [wikipedia.org] , and the Preview Button.

Re:why he chose France (1)

meerling (1487879) | about a year ago | (#45358241)

I would also expect that it would only apply to France as well.
There is a Google.fr, right?

Re:why he chose France (1)

michelcolman (1208008) | about a year ago | (#45357933)

You sued there? Are you Max Mosley, Titus Groan?

Re:why he chose France (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year ago | (#45358091)

Anyone finds out who his guy is and his embarrasing photos, let us know.

Re:why he chose France (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358161)

Another reason is reactionary, "Yanks go home" anti-Americanism. It sells, gives politicians the ability to stay in office, and keeps the populace distracted. Were this a French search engine, none of this would have taken place. However, France (and oftentimes the EU in general) will drag a US company on the carpet because it is good PR for them as opposed to keeping their own house clean.

Freedom paradox (1)

jellomizer (103300) | about a year ago | (#45358245)

Ones freedom is often someones else oppression.
Making laws and rules for a free society are extremely difficult and rarely perfect.
We want the press to be free, but we want our information to be private, however if our neighbor is up to something we want to know.
After an act of terrorism we get all up an arms because the government didn't collect and connect the information of the plot. However we also don't want the government spying on personal lives, and making these connections.
The best we can do is try for the best balance, and deal with the consequences.

Re:Freedom paradox (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358767)

I think that in this case the French law strikes a better balance. There is nothing wrong with having a sexual kink or two and his perplexing penchant for getting whipped by swastika decorated broads should be firmly within his private sphere. But once the pictures were out there, he was thrown into the court of public opinion which is oblivious to feeble notions like due process or constitutionality. Whoever uploaded those private images committed a very evil act.

Re:Freedom paradox (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about a year ago | (#45358947)

So go after the uploader, Google should not be censoring anything.

All bollocks - the bloke is a prick (4, Informative)

Skiron (735617) | about a year ago | (#45357869)

He is the son of Oswald -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oswald_Mosley [wikipedia.org] so that is good CV material to start with

Re:All bollocks - the bloke is a prick (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | about a year ago | (#45358217)

Apparently the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. And look, someone is already doing damage control for Max, removing the Nazi connection from his page: Max Mosley [wikipedia.org] .

Re:All bollocks - the bloke is a prick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358817)

oh look someone added a link to the video anonymously to his wikipedia page

Re:All bollocks - the bloke is a prick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358705)

Oh wow, the BUF flag reminds me of the Grateful Dead logo with the red white and blue skull. Allegedly, the "dancing bears" are said to actually be marching with high steps. Gentleman, start your drug addled fascists-music conspiracies...

Didn't go after anybody? (4, Informative)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#45357873)

In TFA, it says that Moseley won $96,000 in a lawsuit against the infamous News of the World who published the photos. Not that I agree the decision is correct against Google, but the summary is a little lacking.

Re: I think in News of the World issue was "Nazi" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358225)

Hi -

I could be wrong, but I think from another article that I read today that the issue in the 2008 "News Of The World" case (which Mosley won) was the claim by the newspaper that it was a "Nazi" themed orgy.

- Tom

Re: I think in News of the World issue was "Nazi" (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#45358921)

Here my understanding of the story. The News sensationalized the pictures by outright lying about the Nazi theme. Moseley sued and won. He wants all the embarrassing photos removed from the internet including Google. Like I said, I don't particularly agree with the decision but the summary made it seem like it was a personal vendetta against Google.

Yahoo and Webcrawler? (1)

MetalliQaZ (539913) | about a year ago | (#45357897)

I would have used Bing and DuckDuckGo. The other two aren't relevant anymore. Or, was that the point?

Re:Yahoo and Webcrawler? (1)

chentiangemalc (1710624) | about a year ago | (#45358879)

I think the point is this is Slashdot and you can't say anything good about or recommend a Microsoft product here, it's sacrilegious.

This story? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45357915)

http://www.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/News-of-the-World-Max-Mosley-Cover.jpg

Who cares ?

The Video (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45357937)

I found the video [liveleak.com] watch while it lasts.

Re:The Video (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about a year ago | (#45358125)

This is the short and censored version. Supposedly it was a 5 hour video. Anyone got a torrent?

Re:The Video (2)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about a year ago | (#45358459)

Not that it's any of my business, buy why do you want to watch 5 hours of a 72-year old man getting beaten by 5 hookers?

Re:The Video (3, Funny)

mythosaz (572040) | about a year ago | (#45358601)

To paraphrase Zach and Miri,

If you told me there was a 5 hour video of a 72-year old man getting beaten by 5 hookers, I'd say, "Why aren't we watching that right now!"

Re:The Video (2)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#45358635)

It's none of my business either, but do you *seriously* want an answer to that question?

NSFW (1)

mlwmohawk (801821) | about a year ago | (#45357983)

Yahoo has them.

Just saying :-)

Elevating the Streisand effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45357997)

This takes the Streisand effect to new heights. He's a bit of a dim bulb that Mosley dude.

Re:Elevating the Streisand effect (1)

michelcolman (1208008) | about a year ago | (#45358189)

Maybe he's doing it on purpose. Exposing his kinky sexual habits to the whole world might just be huge a turn-on for him, and he's even getting money for it? Win-win!

Actually, the more I think of it, the more this seems to be the only viable explanation.

tmi (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358015)

too much information! where is the brain bleach? lol

Before we exploit the Streisand effect... (1)

pla (258480) | about a year ago | (#45358037)

You might want to do a GIS for this guy WITH safesearch on, before trying to find the pictures mentioned in TFA.

Trust me, you do not want to see these pics. Ban them from the internet with fire!

I am no fan of Google, but... (1)

mlwmohawk (801821) | about a year ago | (#45358057)

One has to admit that they are an important part of the Internet infrastructure. Billions and Billions of dollars of commerce are generated by Google searches for companies that have little or no direct contact with Google. Every time a government does this, Google should shut that country off until the various entities that DEPEND on the free exchange of information complain and withhold campaign contributions/bribes.

Re:I am no fan of Google, but... (1)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#45358297)

That was my first thought as well. If they ask the impossible, stop giving them anything at all.

Re:I am no fan of Google, but... (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about a year ago | (#45358319)

One has to admit that they are an important part of the Internet infrastructure. Billions and Billions of dollars of commerce are generated by Google searches for companies that have little or no direct contact with Google. Every time a government does this, Google should shut that country off until the various entities that DEPEND on the free exchange of information complain and withhold campaign contributions/bribes.

Or Microsoft buys a few more servers for Bing.

Re:I am no fan of Google, but... (1)

mlwmohawk (801821) | about a year ago | (#45358795)

Or Microsoft buys a few more servers for Bing.

If, of course, Bing were usable in any way. Bing is terrible. Bing makes it clear that Microsoft is on its way out as a dictator of the market. Besides capitalizing on the dumb luck of becoming the dominant OS company in the 1980s. It is simply amazing to me how long they were able to keep that going.

Re:I am no fan of Google, but... (1)

chentiangemalc (1710624) | about a year ago | (#45358903)

obviously haven't used bing recently

Here's an idea: (2)

fredrated (639554) | about a year ago | (#45358229)

every request for Google from a french ip address results in a 'the web page you requested could not be found.' message.
The French will be shitting into their snails before you can say 'Les Cargo'!

Re:Here's an idea: (3, Funny)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#45358333)

Les Cargo

Clippy: It looks like you aret trying to write "escargot". Would you like to continue saying "the cargo" in French?

Re:Here's an idea: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358697)

And leave a 60m people market to M$/bing, who will gladly comply? It seems to me that in your dimwitted fervor you have forgotten how that capitalism thing works.

brilliant! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358287)

Instead of some mild and uninteresting pictures, when you search for "Max Mosley", you now get hits about something involving Max Moseley, five female prostitutes, and a Nazi S&M sex orgy. Way to go!

And you learn that he is the son of Sir Oswald Mosley, founder of the British Union of Fascists, and looking like he stepped out of Monty Python sketch. (I'm assuming "Sir" is not merely an S&M title, but I suppose you can't be sure at this point.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oswald_Mosley

NOT f1, former FIA resident (1)

Zlurg (591611) | about a year ago | (#45358347)

The FIA is the governing body over F1 (and WRC and many other forms of racing) Max was president before the incumbent, Jean Todt, who used to head up Ferrari's F1 effort with Ross Brawn (today of Mercedes).

Max Mosley the nazi. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358357)

Max Mosley is a nazi.

Google knows all.

He's setting a precedent (2)

davecb (6526) | about a year ago | (#45358359)

If he can defeat Google in open court, he can use the case as a precedent to defeat anyone. This is the brave litigant's version of "choose a good target". Cowardly litigants start with the person who has the worst chance of defending themselves, but if they cave, its doesn't set a precedent.

He's not after Google: he's after everyone.

Lawyer stuff is subtle (and some of them are quick to anger (:-))

--dave

Ask Mosley to write/supply the filtering algorithm (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#45358363)

Certainly if he believes it must be technologically possible for Google to do, then he should be able to supply them with an algorithm which accomplishes the desired ends.

Google is the expert here... if they are saying that a problem is not tractable for them to manage, there's a pretty good chance that they are right. It should be up to those who would dispute that position to prove that Google is wrong.

Re:Ask Mosley to write/supply the filtering algori (1)

Arkh89 (2870391) | about a year ago | (#45358665)

Yeah, if only Google had some sort of technical way of taking down some results of its search engine upon external request just like it is doing for DMCA requests... oh wait...

Re:Ask Mosley to write/supply the filtering algori (4, Informative)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#45358689)

They take those down on a case-by-case basis, by request. They aren't presented with a standing fine that will occur for each and every instance that ever happens in the future

worldwide ban (2)

stenvar (2789879) | about a year ago | (#45358383)

Note that the French court is attempting to impose a worldwide ban. How's that for European legal overreach?

Re:worldwide ban (1)

sconeu (64226) | about a year ago | (#45358873)

Please, get with the bashing program. The French are Euro types. Only TEH EV1L5 USA attempts to impose its laws worldwide.

Re:worldwide ban (1)

jo_ham (604554) | about a year ago | (#45359017)

Makes a change from bombing shepherds on a mountainside with B2's in the name of "freedom".

Although, I think I'd be more worried about the legal overreach. Lawyers are more dangerous than nuclear-capable stealth aircraft.

HA! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358395)

The first rule about nazi themed BDSM orgies; never talk about nazi themed BDSM orgies.

Doesn't this have to stop at some point? (3, Insightful)

Kubla Kahhhn! (3042441) | about a year ago | (#45358521)

At some point, doesn't the world just have to say "Sorry, government of France, this is how the internet works and we can't take parts of it out just because someone in France is offended by it"?

Libelous summery? (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358591)

The whole point of the court cases has been it was not a Nazi themed orgy. The newspapers and the prostitutes just made that bit up to sell papers. In fact it has been proven it court that it was merely an Englishman going to a brothel to be beaten by dominatrix prostitutes and his right to do so privately has now been upheld by the French courts.

So, repost it ... (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about a year ago | (#45358605)

As a public service, everyone should put up at least a link to the story (if not the pictures).

Show them the Streisand effect in action.

This is amusing (5, Insightful)

Jody Bruchon (3404363) | about a year ago | (#45358715)

Somehow I doubt that anyone on Slashdot is offended by the notion of a Nazi-themed orgy. The Internet generation doesn't get shocked very easily anymore. Goatse, Tubgirl, NumberGenderNumberContainer videos, and half the memes ever created are far more offensive than some people having a role-playing orgy behind closed doors.

I believe I just coined the term NumberGenderNumberContainer...

Re:This is amusing (1)

locopuyo (1433631) | about a year ago | (#45358993)

You forgot kids in a sandbox and 2 girls 1 cup.

It's reining them in (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358729)

as you would a horse

The reins are used to make the horse turn left or right if you pull them in the right way.

That'll learn ya =)

Re:It's reining them in (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about a year ago | (#45358861)

The reign in Spain falls mainly on the reins, but the Rain never complains.

Re:It's reining them in (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358971)

One of my favorite headlines, from a student newspaper: "Bush to Reign in Federal Spending"

Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45358773)

In this day and age it's laughable to think that once your private photos/videos hit the Internet that you have any expectation of reigning them in or filtering the embarrassing parts out.

Why not? You psychotic assholes successfully removed Maureen O'Gara's articles about Pamela Jones [forbes.com] from the web, why can't this pervert do the same?

Not to worry, the NSA already has copies of vid (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about a year ago | (#45358845)

And are using it to blackmail him right now.

Oh, wait, sorry, in spook speak that's "encourage cooperation".

A Huge problem (3, Insightful)

b4upoo (166390) | about a year ago | (#45358991)

The very nature of the net is such that no nation should be allowed to demand anything at all concerning content. France is a fine nation but the notion that they can have any voice in that which is displayed world wide is absurd. Obviously different groups of people have vastly different morals and beliefs. What the net does is give everyone the ability to be offended half out of their minds. What may be considered a savage crime in one place or an act of perversion in another place is perfectly acceptable in other places. Frankly I do not want any nation having any ability to censor the net. It is up to all of us to step up to the plate and be willing to be shocked, mortified, enraged or degraded in order to maintain freedom. Free people should not vote to restrain the freedom of others.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?