×

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!

Italy's First Steps in Censoring the Internet

CowboyNeal posted more than 6 years ago | from the slippery-slopes dept.

Censorship 90

mijio writes "It's not the first time that Italy discusses Internet censorship. The last year, after some guys appeared in a video punching and blaming a kid with Down syndrome, Minister of Education Fioroni brought in to trial two of Google Italy's managers and then proposed and strongly sustained his idea of censoring the Internet to protect the young. Now Ricardo Levi, the prime minister's right hand, is finally successful in promulgating his law on internet censorship. With the goal of "promoting and enriching the pluralism of information," the law rules that everyone involved in "editorial activity" must be subscribed to the "Registry of Operators of Communication" to be prosecutable in case of defamation, where "editorial product" is defined as "any product with purpose of information, education, divulgation, entertainment, aimed at publication, no matter the form it is realized in and the mean it is distributed with." When inquired about the effects of this rule for bloggers, Levi responded, "We have no interest in touching amatorial or personal sites, it would be not feasible". The Times speaks about this paradox as well."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

90 comments

How's this for defamation? (4, Insightful)

Associate (317603) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140087)

Italy sucks!
Regulate that.

Re:How's this for defamation? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21140801)

It's the JEWS, stupid...
It's the JEWS who want to censor any dissent, and the internet is our last hope of exposing the JEWS who run our white countries...

Re:How's this for defamation? (2)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140817)

I don't get it. Is "It's the JEWS, stupid..." some kind of obligatory joke? Or is it just plain ol' vanilla racism?

Re:How's this for defamation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21142525)

Just plain old racism. It's started happening a whole hell of a lot more recently. Some kind of retarded "initiative" by the white power groups.

Re:How's this for defamation? (1)

MadnessASAP (1052274) | more than 6 years ago | (#21144003)

I would call it more of an obligatory joke, the jews have been blamed and prosecuted to a rediculous extent (IMNSHO) to the point thats it's almost a joke to "blame it on the jews"

Re:How's this for defamation? (2, Funny)

pla (258480) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140921)

Italy sucks! Regulate that.

Nonono, don't blame the country, blame the asshats who push for idiocy like this.

Try:

Fioroni, who only defend retards for the familial resemblance, molests dead sheep; Ricardo Levi takes sloppy seconds while snorting lines of coke off the penises of 8YO boys. And they both smell funny. And... Uhhh... I dunno, something about watching too many American mafia movies if I could find the right phrasing to make it insulting but not just a racist joke, and some sort of insult to the pope for good measure.

Oh hell. Lost it there.

Doodie!

Re:How's this for defamation? (0, Flamebait)

ncc74656 (45571) | more than 6 years ago | (#21141767)

"The dark night of fascism is always descending on America, but it always seems to land in Europe."

-- Tom Wolfe

step back (5, Informative)

l3mure (539607) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140101)

Riccardo Levi already stepped back: There was a misunderstanding, he said, we don't want to censor anything and actions will be taken to clarify the law on this point.

Re:step back (1)

mijio (539043) | more than 6 years ago | (#21141155)

He has stepped back in front of journalists. Then he had reproposed the same rule with different formulation

Re:step back (1)

Lord Yupa (717292) | more than 6 years ago | (#21142837)

The law is not restrictive in the new formulation: it is unclear and confused, so they can use it only against dissidents...

Re:step back (1)

josephdrivein (924831) | more than 6 years ago | (#21147195)

Watch out. This is ordinary in Italian politics.
The scheme is:
1. Speak about a very restrictive law that is being written.
2. Wait for the reaction of the media. If they criticize you, step back and say you were "misunderstood".
3. Change the criticized aspects of the law, introduce a bit of freedom. This is how you wanted the law to be from the beginning. Everyone should understand that this is a reasonable compromise between what is needed and what is possible to do. Now the media won't care about it anymore, it's not news. No more criticism except from your political opponents, but that doesn't matter because you opponents criticize you anyway.
4. The law is approved with the regular iter.
5. Profit ?!?

Dupe, and disinformed to say the least. (4, Informative)

lbbros (900904) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140127)

First of all this is a dupe. The original story [slashdot.org] has already been published. Secondly, this is just (again!) a sensationalistic spin on a law that:
  • It is uncostitutional: see here [lulu.com] (link in Italian);
  • It won't be proposed in this form due to the huge debate it has raised.
Please, Slashdot editors... do at least some basic research before posting stuff like this.

Re:Dupe, and disinformed to say the least. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21140141)

Just because it's not unconstitutional, doesn't mean it's right.

Re:Dupe, and disinformed to say the least. (4, Informative)

lbbros (900904) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140153)

But it means it won't pass or it will be struck down. Don't forget it's just a proposal for a law.

You misunderstood. (3, Funny)

Gription (1006467) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140849)

He didn't say "unconstitutional". He actually said "uncostitutional".

The cost of any internet censorship scheme would be astronomical so I would have to agree that it is uncostitutional.

Re:You misunderstood. (1)

lbbros (900904) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140953)

Well, I try my best at English but I'm not a native speaker, therefore some errors may creep up. That is one of those, as the Italian equivalent is "incostituzionale", without the "n".

Re:You misunderstood. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21141987)

Shut the fuck up, you stupid dagoe.

Hey! (1)

Gription (1006467) | more than 6 years ago | (#21142413)

Don't be derogatory just because someone is of a certain nationality or race. Everywhere I have gone I have found wonderful people to share a drink with. (Italians seem to know more about relaxing then just about anyone so they get extra bonus points to boot...)

If you are going to bag on him do it because he just doesn't get the joke.

futile - [fyoot-l, fyoo-tahyl]
-adjective
1. trifling; frivolous; unimportant.
2. responding to anonymous cowards.

Re:Dupe, and disinformed to say the least. (4, Informative)

Tim C (15259) | more than 6 years ago | (#21141033)

Please, Slashdot editors... do at least some basic research before posting stuff like this.

From the FAQ [slashdot.org]:

How do you verify the accuracy of Slashdot stories?

We don't. You do. :)


The answer was last modified 7 years ago. People have been complaining about this sort of thing for as long as I've been on the site. It's not going to change; they don't care. They are far more focussed on getting stories up quickly than on checking for factual correctness.

Re:Dupe, and disinformed to say the least. (1)

wykthorr (999067) | more than 6 years ago | (#21141569)

They are far more focussed on getting stories up quickly than on checking for factual correctness.
That's exactly what I like about Slashdot.

failed laws pass camouflaged after a year or so (1)

wikinerd (809585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21141577)

It is uncostitutional

Constitution can change as well, and even if it is violated no one will notice or bother.

It won't be proposed in this form due to the huge debate it has raised.

I bet that the government will pass the law in another form: As a data protection law which will say that everyone who keeps a file with personal information will have to register with the government (or an authority - which is the same thing in my opinion).

Then if you create a blog and accept comments, and your blog software asks for the email address of the people posting the comments, your blog's database may be seen as incorporating personal information and therefore failing to register your blog with the government will result in you being imprisoned for 2 or 3 years and paying a huge fine.

In the end the only way to conduct online business or having a blog will be to store no information about your clients or visitors at all, which I don't think is a bad thing (although it does create practical problems, and many sites wouldn't function at all), but in case one of your clients or site visitors posts something illegal online through your user-generated content Web 2.0 site and you failed to delete it immediately (let's say you were in vacations or had to work overtime in a day job) you will have to explain to the government why you failed to implement their other law about keeping information that can help the police catch online criminals.

So, they will have one law saying that you can't not collect some personal information (that you can't delete your server logs or conduct business without knowing the name or address of your client), and another law saying that if you possess any information about any person then you have to register with the government, and as an "added bonus" you will also have to explain to the government exactly how your network/server security infrastructure works (eg how strong encryption you use, so that they can be better prepared to break it), where the server is physically located (so that they can capture it more easily), and you will also need a special permit to have your server out of the country as the data protection law will specify that one has to ask for permission before storing personal data outside the country.

And the funny thing is that the people will support these laws thinking that they protect their personal data. People will support it thinking that it is necessary for protection against criminals etc. But people don't know that freedom is needed for a society to flourish, and you can't have science, philosophy, commerce, and art in a non-free world. Laws have great collateral damage, and even if they help catching a few criminals, they may also be used for political purposes.

The fact that Internet still exists is thanks to its use by big commercial businesses. Had the Internet remained a network for amateurs and hackers (in the ESR's definition, eg a great programmer and a person who loves computers - the criminals who break your server are called crackers, not hackers, no matter what TV says) it would have been banned long ago (this, or the government would have required every modem to incorporate a government's spying chip). But because commercial businesses found Internet useful and it got economic value, it was allowed to flourish without much control. However, I don't think this will be allowed for too long. For example, with the TCPA (Treacherous Computing, also known as Trusted Computing) initiative, we could see cryptography chips in our hardware controlling what software we can run on our PCs (hint hint: GNU/Linux distros will be excluded as "hacking tools" because they contain nmap and similar utils), and laws requiring every Internet-connected PC to have such a chip embedded (without you knowing the encryption/sign keys).

While Western democratic governments may not be so control freaks, other governments (eg China PRC's communists, or Myanmar's military dictators) are keen to control Internet usage to a great extent. And knowing that democracy in the West is now being quickly eroded, I am afraid that within 10 or 20 years we may see again antidemocratic rulers like Hitler in charge of Western countries. Just imagine how well Hitler or similar dictators they could use our existing censorship laws. They would suit them very well. Which is why I think any censorship laws should be banned at internationally.

(and also imagine how happy the next Hitler would be with our nuclear warheads, especially if he becomes the leader of a country with lots of them, like US or Russia - and knowing that modern Russia with its communist legacy is anything but democratic and that the US population is quickly forgetting what democracy means I am not very optimistic about the future use of their many nuclear warheads)

Re:failed laws pass camouflaged after a year or so (2, Interesting)

lbbros (900904) | more than 6 years ago | (#21146567)

I bet that the government will pass the law in another form: As a data protection law which will say that everyone who keeps a file with personal information will have to register with the government (or an authority - which is the same thing in my opinion).

That won't happen easily. The privacy laws here are *very* strict, and often governments or other institutions have been slapped for violating them, publicly. To use personal data you have to state exactly why are you using them, and you can always have them removed. Even when there are cameras for crime prevention, usually there are notices and the data, unless there is a court order, must be destroyed within a small time frame (IIRC, 48 hours).

Italy has many faults, but the privacy law was not one of them.

And about the Constitution, you are mistaken: although IMO it needs to change in other areas (it is still the product of a compromise done in 1948), it has a rather strong perception in the public and political view. That doesn't prevent people to try and mess up with it, of course, but such changes won't go too unnoticed.

Re:failed laws pass camouflaged after a year or so (1)

wikinerd (809585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21146923)

it has a rather strong perception in the public and political view.

I have to say that I don't know the internal political landscape in Italy or the Italians's perception of politics. If Italians are aware of their constitution that's a good thing (in other countries people don't know what their constitution says). I have visited Italy but I didn't stay long enough to learn much about it (I loved it though so I will surely visit it again at first opportunity!).

The Italian people are pretty cool (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21140145)

They are some of the most well behaved non-white people I have ever met.

Re:The Italian people are pretty cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21146705)

Perhaps a reference to this? [youtube.com]

In Soviet Russia... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21140165)

...they congratulate because the torch is being carried on!

Re:In Soviet Russia... (1)

yoprst (944706) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140345)

jokes aside, Russia is far from being a forefront of internet censorship, thanks to outrageous incompetence of government officials

Re:In Soviet Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21142299)

In Soviet Italy, pasta eats YOU!

Idiots (2, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140167)

"registering all web site operators" scheme was proposed even in turkey, then abandoned. italians are even behind turkey when it comes to internet, apparently. "protecting the young" my butt. the only thing the young need protection from, are rotten spirited politicians like those.

Re:Idiots (1)

eaman (710548) | more than 6 years ago | (#21145485)

A register for on-line publication has been active in Italy for years, and it's not mandatory.
It's meant to enforce trust for those who wish to use it, and it's mandatory to become eligible for those public financial aid we have for press.

This is happening in Germany as well (5, Interesting)

Vlad_the_Inhaler (32958) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140181)

A German court recently forced one of the larger ISPs to block access to the Youporn site [youporn.com]. Originally they (the ISP) tried it by blocking access to the IP-Address but since Youporn is hosted by GoDaddy, that blocked their customers' access to thousands of other sites as well. Now they have tried it at the DNS level.

The background to this is that a German porn site had to implement stringent controls to make sure the underage did not manage to sample their wares. Youporn did not bother with this and so had an unfair advantage. I read that Youporn is something like the 14th most popular site in Germany.

Several other organisations apparently have similar plans to shut down access to some site or other.

Re:This is happening in Germany as well (4, Informative)

jotok (728554) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140497)

Youporn did not bother with this and so had an unfair advantage.

Interesting to note that this was more about economic competition than "Save the Children!"

I've been living and working in Germany for about a month now and this economy doesn't really like "competition" or anything like that. Anyone selling you anything (car, TV, apartment) first asks you how much you are willing to spend; you have to pay all kinds of outrageous extra fees for really no service (it's not uncommon for the realtor/property manager who finds you a place to demand ~3000 euro for their 1 day of work); and businesses collude to keep prices up (nobody is "allowed" to sell for lower prices).

So it's not suprising to me that that this was an issue of halting "competition" rather than protecting young minds.

Re:This is happening in Germany as well (2, Insightful)

ElMiguel (117685) | more than 6 years ago | (#21141303)

I've been living and working in Germany for about a month now

Isn't it a bit early to make that sort of general statements about Germany?

Re:This is happening in Germany as well (1)

jotok (728554) | more than 6 years ago | (#21142475)

Nah. That post is 10% personal observations and 90% anecdotes from longterm expats.

Eventually I'll get used to the absolute lack of motivation around here, and then I won't be so frustrated.

Censorhip should be made universally illegal (1)

wikinerd (809585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21141177)

Government asking ISPs to block access to certain sites (any sites) should be made illegal worldwide. ISPs lose money and undergo additional expenses incurred by government censors: They cannot provide true unlimited access to the Internet and have to spend time and money in blocking sites. Government censors interfere with their business and if they make the life of ISP entrepreneurs very difficult then we will stop seeing more small new ISPs being founded because of the costs and risks involved and Internet access will become the monopoly of one or two "government-backed" ISPs. Government censorship actively discourages young entrepreneurs to startup ISP businesses and contributed to the unemployment problem. The business model of an ISP is to offer access to the Internet, and the ISP is neither responsible for what you do with it, nor it should tell you what is good or bad. It's like roads: How would you feel if trying to take a road with your car resulted in a police officer stoping you and informing you that you have been blacklisted off road access because you are a Jew or Arab, or because your car is painted black and the government doesn't like this colour? Blocking sites may create problems to people who do academic research as well, destroying our chance to discover and analyse new social phenomena.

Re:Censorhip should be made universally illegal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21144295)

Government asking ISPs to block access to certain sites (any sites) should be made illegal worldwide.

And how would you suggest this happen? Seeing as how governments generally decide illegal vs legal. And international law is written by governments in cooperation: how many of these, even that oppose censorship, are going to support a measure which interferes so much with a nation's internal affairs?

practically very difficult... impossible? no (1)

wikinerd (809585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21145407)

It could happen if people provided a financial and political incentive for abolishing all censorship laws worldwide. If a huge number of citizens worldwide agreed not to buy anything from nations that have censorship laws (eg the communist China PRC), voted for pro-freespeech politicians, and asked international organisations such as the EU and UN to formally recognise any censorship as equal to slavery, then it could happen. The important thing would be to make it happen with democratic consensus and via our current democratic institutions. For this reason, the people themselves should find a way to make the governments themselves feel more at ease with the idea of allowing greater freedoms to their subjects (which would be easier if people were more mature in their way of thinking and their actions, but it is a fact that most people today are unable to constructively use their freedom - whether this is a valid argument against giving them freedom, I am not sure but I tend to say freedom is non-negotiable). For example, in China PRC's case, people could push peacefully for the eradication of communism and censorship, while allowing the current leaders to have a position in a new democratic government. It is important to realise that governments and groups of leaders act as collective living beings that look after their own survival and self-preservation, and are keen to use violence if their own survival is at stake. So, for harmonious reforms to be made, people must massively and decisively ask for *gentle* progressive step-by-step social and legal changes over time, while at the same time not forgetting their greater goals and principles. Yes, it's difficult.

Practically, I don't see it happening any time soon, and I see discussions about such issues as mostly theoretical, for the reason that the people in general are stupid and incapable of putting their neurons in good use. Furthermore, many people see advantages in maintaining censorship laws, as long as they don't affect them directly. I didn't say it's easy... It is a fact that only a smart diplomat with a mind as clear as a philosopher's and as rational as a scientist's could handle such negotiations, but in reality the negotiations happen between two groups (governments and peoples) that are both irrational and have no idea what they really want, and so tend to act based on emotion and bureaucratic rules, often without any insight into the greater situation, even at the individual level.

So, realistically speaking, it can't happen because not enough people understand and agree to the concept of free speech. Theoretically, if a huge number of people agreed to it then it would be a matter of time until the total eradication of censorship.

But in the past some people could say the same about the slavery system, and at some point it was replaced by a more relaxed, improved, and more just system (albeit imperfect and not that much different in its basic properties, and the system unfortunately did not come together with changes in social subconscious psychological conceptualisations), at least here in the West. It took thousands of years but it happened (whether it will last I don't know... societal advances are not permanent and human societies can easily fall into less advanced levels if freedoms and rights are not used daily and if people don't understand the issues).

If you ask for my gut-feeling non-scientific personal time estimate, I think humanity will need some more 1000-1500 years before it abolishes censorship universally. The reason I think it will take so long is because I believe we are falling into another dark age (which I define as emergence of collective-massive irrationality, authoritarianism, war, etc, and yes this includes censorship), and I am not sure how long it will last but I would assume that with the technological tools available now future authoritarian rulers or organisations (eg a future church) could easily control large populations for at least a millennium (which is why people who understand the issues must push for the greater democratisation of technology and especially user-controlled/copylefted technology such as the GNU OS or networking platforms like RONJA, and their adoption by the mainstream society).

Lastly, it is important to use your real name and not post anonymously when speaking about freedom. Freedom is to be used, and having the ability to back up what you say with your name is an important freedom. If you don't use your freedoms you are going to lose them.

It's Italy, wait a week (-1, Troll)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140193)

Minister of Education Fioroni brought in to trial two of Google Italy's managers and then proposed and strongly sustained his idea of censoring the Internet to protect the young. Now Ricardo Levi, the prime minister's right hand, is finally successful in promulgating his law on internet censorship

We're talking about a country that changes governments like people change underwear. Relax and wait a week.

Re:It's Italy, wait a week (2, Funny)

rumith (983060) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140335)

We're talking about a country that changes governments like people change underwear. Relax and wait a week.
You mean people change underwear once a week? I should have known...

Re:It's Italy, wait a week (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21142629)

We're talking about a country that changes governments like people change underwear. Relax and wait a week.


Unfortunately you don't remember how most laws conceived to protect Berlusconi's information monopoly were approved by ministers from the left wing and those to protect corrupt politicians, from both wings, were approved unanimously by all ministers from the right wing.

In Italy there's no Left or Right. Those are fakes created to make common people believe they can be effective by voting, in fact dividing and conquering them, with great help from government-bent media like all major TV networks and newspapers.

If you aren't Italian you should read something about the current Ministry of Justice, Clemente Mastella, who has good links with Mafia Bosses (Yes, and he's Ministry of Justice!), and is succeeding in his plot to transfer one of the last magistrates who has the guts to question him and the crimes he has committed by robbing European funds and giving them to companies of his friends in exchange for votes.

If you are European, this man is stealing your resources too.

amatorial? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21140211)

[...]Levi responded, "We have no interest in touching amatorial or personal sites, it would be not feasible."
What does "amatorial" mean?

Re:amatorial? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21140275)

Am`a`tori`ala. 1. Of or pertaining to a lover or to love making; amatory; as, amatorial verses. dumbass. next time look it up yourself bitch.

Levi = Jew (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21140219)

This Levi person is a Jew.

That is all you need to know about him and his evil intentions.

it's a perfect scheme ... to create a cushy job (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21140283)

btw, is the position any less valid than say ... the DEA?

In the last year (2, Funny)

binarybum (468664) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140343)

man, I totally remember the last year when that video came out - that kid was seriously blamed!

anyone else see a contradiction? (3, Insightful)

hcmtnbiker (925661) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140405)

after some guys appeared in a video punching and blaming a kid with Down syndrome

then proposed and strongly sustained his idea of censoring the Internet to protect the young.

Anyone else see a glaring contradiction here? If it was censored no one would have ever seen the video, in turn the kid would have never had his story shown, and in turn no one would have ever cared about him getting punched. The problem with censoring "graphical" content is it promotes exactly what the supporters of the censoring tell you it's trying to avoid, apathy.

Re:anyone else see a contradiction? (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140611)

If it was censored no one would have ever seen the video, in turn the kid would have never had his story shown, and in turn no one would have ever cared about him getting punched. The problem with censoring "graphical" content is it promotes exactly what the supporters of the censoring tell you it's trying to avoid, apathy.

In the real world the bully lives for his chance to play before an audience. The Internet gives him a far bigger stage.

Re:anyone else see a contradiction? (1)

Fizzl (209397) | more than 6 years ago | (#21141479)

And 97% better chance to getting convicted becuse there is clear evidence available.

Re:anyone else see a contradiction? (1)

epee1221 (873140) | more than 6 years ago | (#21142311)

And while we're pointing out contradictions...
They propose this in response to a couple of idiots posting a video, and then they say they won't actually go after "personal" postings.

Re:anyone else see a contradiction? (1)

DerWulf (782458) | more than 6 years ago | (#21146995)

exactly. But societies operate on see no evil hear no evil. Same with child porn. While I dispise it, naturally, there is really no good reason to forbid someone from showing of their criminal activities. Instead of going after the original crimes far to many law enforcement recourses are being diverted to fighting secondary consequences. One could say the same for anti drug laws which where originally designed to curb crimes related to drug aquisition. Now there is a whole new class of criminals, prisons are full with drug addicts and police departments have drug specialists, k9 squads and so forth. Yet theft, burglary and robbings haven't gone down. I wonder what kind of world we could life in if it weren't for the laws that periodically expand the number of criminals (sometimes by millions at a time) without producing any messurable effects on public safety.

Amatorial? (1)

aysa (452184) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140441)

"We have no interest in touching amatorial or personal sites"

Italians! That is the only thing they have in mind.

Re:Amatorial? (1)

eaman (710548) | more than 6 years ago | (#21145543)

You know Valentino Rossi has a "WLF" on the necklace of his suit: it goes for "Viva la Figa!"
No, I won't translate the last word for you, and you should not google for it without a good pop up stopper :P

Sure is lots of censorship going on in Europe (-1, Flamebait)

thrash242 (697169) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140477)

The UK straight up banned Manhunt 2 because of, among other things its "tone", Germany bans pretty much anything with violence (AFAIK) and now Italy is censoring the internet.

Why do so many Europeans need to be protected from themselves and why do they allow it?

Re:Sure is lots of censorship going on in Europe (4, Insightful)

whoever57 (658626) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140815)

Why do so many Europeans need to be protected from themselves and why do they allow it?
Europeans wonder why Americans need to be protected against seeing human skin and natural acts between consenting adults.

Re:Sure is lots of censorship going on in Europe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21140991)

And the Irish wonder why we are getting such a pack of whining from both directions.

Re:Sure is lots of censorship going on in Europe (1)

thrash242 (697169) | more than 6 years ago | (#21144749)

Our government bans nothing based on nudity or sex. An adult can freely go and buy all kinds of porn here. Try buying Manhunt 2 in the UK. It's banned by a governmental body and cannot be legally sold there.

Re:Sure is lots of censorship going on in Europe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21144861)

Hey you Mr. FCC, have you no advice for me?

Re:Sure is lots of censorship going on in Europe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21152085)

Our government bans nothing based on nudity or sex. An adult can freely go and buy all kinds of porn here.

Is that so? Please explain this [avn.com] then.

(Posting anonymously as I don't want to be associated with a certain fetish - think tubgirl - in public. Almost a pity: an on-topic reference to tubgirl should be worth at least an "insightful" mod or two.)

Re:Sure is lots of censorship going on in Europe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21141297)

Why does your country suck?

Yeah. You take that to the bank, and you cash it.

There are good sides of censoring the internet (1)

zukinux (1094199) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140597)

I do not support censoring the internet, but you can look at this problem in a better prospective, such as thinking about the exploited teens that are shown in some site in a pornographic manners, that I support of being censored.

Also, I support of censoring sites of cults that calls for murders/Nazism, but where's the censorship is wrong? Well, that's a relative question. I.e I do not support censoring cnn.com if the give an interview for Usama Bin-Laden I do think it's wrong but I wouldn't censor it, but there are some countries who would think this interview is wrong and would support censoring it.
Like in every other thing in our life where's the red line?

Re:There are good sides of censoring the internet (1)

Zibblsnrt (125875) | more than 6 years ago | (#21142933)

Like in every other thing in our life where's the red line?

A lot of the time, there isn't one.

Welcome to the real world.

Re:There are good sides of censoring the internet (0, Flamebait)

lahi (316099) | more than 6 years ago | (#21151859)

Nonsense. If you don't want teens exploited, have laws that forbid *that*. Then, when a site posts porn showing girls who didn't consent to this, use that law instead. No need to have carte blanche laws to rubber stamp whatever type of censorship you would like.

I notice your .il website. So let me ask you a question directly. I presume it is forbidden in Israel, just like it is in Germany and a couple other European countries, to deny holocaust. Now the question: Is it also forbidden to say that water isn't wet? If no, why not? Why is the absurd denial of one known fact allowed, and the equally absurd denial of another, forbidden? I never understood the logic behind that. Insult? I can't see how anyone could be insulted by someone demonstrating extreme stupidity. If someone would try to insult me, for example by saying my mother was a prostitute, it would be pointless. It would be like trying to insult me by saying 2+2=5.

In my opinion, censorship of nazism is itself nazism. The creeps thrive far better underground, so by all means let us keep them out in the open, where we can watch them, ridicule them, and above all be aware of them.

Censorship is bad, end of story. That is not to say that there should be no penalty for publishing certain things (child porn being the obvious example), but that these matters can be dealt with without (preemptive) censorship. There is no red line.

-Lasse Hillerøe Petersen

Re:There are good sides of censoring the internet (1)

lahi (316099) | more than 6 years ago | (#21161789)

Wow. A (-1) flamebait mod. I'm not sure if this is actually a first for me, but it definitely comes as a surprise. A sad surprise, may I add. I would by far have preferred a proper argument.

So I presume that you will agree that a huge amount of religious works, including the bible, should be banned, as they offend me by contradicting and thus denying a well-established historical fact, the fact of biological evolution. No? Then perhaps banning holocaust denial is also a bad idea.

Again, my point in writing here is that I get the shivers each time politicians in a European country try to impose a little censorship, like Italy this time. (Last time was German minister of justice B. Zypriess, trying to extend their ridiculous nazi-complex to all of Europe, fortunately that was also prevented.) The reason I am scared is that there is actually a chance that such a law would also be implemented in Denmark, and I would really, really hate that. Not because I sympathize in any way with nazis, but because it is important to uphold the "neutrality" of freedom of speech, as it was formulated by Voltaire: "Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write."

Once you allow censorship, you'll soon see that it can just as easily be used to opress the truth.

BTW, how is Mordechai Vanunu doing these days?

-Lasse Hillerøe Petersen

Re:There are good sides of censoring the internet (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 6 years ago | (#21174797)

I do not support censoring the internet, but you can look at this problem in a better prospective, such as thinking about the exploited teens that are shown in some site in a pornographic manners, that I support of being censored.

Like in every other thing in our life where's the red line?


Well, there's an obvious line between images made only with consenting adults, and images that involve non-consenting participants.

For the most part, that's not even a "line", more like a big gaping division - in the same way that most people can see the difference between rape and sex that isn't rape. The only grey area is age of consent.

As soon as we accept that the difference between what consenting adults do, and rape, is merely drawing a line somewhere, we get anti-sex / pro-censorship campaigners thinking it's fine to draw the line somewhere else, including criminialising acts (or images of acts) between consenting adults.

They have it backwards. (4, Interesting)

thehatmaker (1168507) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140677)

Surely if censorship of the internet is to "Protect Children" then why not simply ban children from using the internet? This proposal would be like seeing children in a pub, then making everyone drink water, so the kids dont get drunk. what i never understood is, why try to keep children "innocent" only to viscously corrupt them with the hideous reality of their pathetic lives at 18?

Re:They have it backwards. (1)

mistralol (987952) | more than 6 years ago | (#21145795)

Normally if you tell a kid not todo something they will go and do it !
Kids can also be very resourceful when you tell them not todo something ;)

Re:They have it backwards. (1)

lahi (316099) | more than 6 years ago | (#21151975)

And the day it is no longer so, all hope is really lost.

-Lasse Hillerøe Petersen

My God! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21140711)

after some guys appeared in a video punching and blaming a kid with Down syndrome

My God, punching I can understand. But blaming?! The world has gone decidedly downhill when people can blame at will! For shame! I blame the school system!

Whew, I was worried for a minute! (1)

LM741N (258038) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140775)

This shouldn't effect my IED bomb making site a bit.

Re:Whew, I was worried for a minute! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21141223)

Is that like an ATM machine web site ? :-)

Re:Whew, I was worried for a minute! (1)

LM741N (258038) | more than 6 years ago | (#21144435)


"Is that like an ATM machine web site ? :-)"

Yes, you use your Syrian Express Card "Can't Come Back"

Someone punches a retard and Italy goes Nazi? (2, Funny)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140779)

Come on Italy... are you that afraid of information?

Re:Someone punches a retard and Italy goes Nazi? (1)

lennyhell (869433) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140945)

Sir, I'm so proud of my glorious nation today. Finally people here are realizing how dangerous bloggers are and that we must act to stop them clogging up our tubes. Bloggers are a cancer and we'll get rid of that cancer soon.

Re:Someone punches a retard and Italy goes Nazi? (1)

axettone (1168915) | more than 6 years ago | (#21147071)

No, we aren't afraid. A lot of italian people think that this kind of law is sh*t, but our politicians are almost old and they're total n00bs. 90% of them don't know what a blog is.
However this proposal has been retired by the minister, so no censorship will be applied at all.
Greetings from Italy!

Old sig (3, Insightful)

PinkyGigglebrain (730753) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140951)

"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge,
For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master"

I used to use this as my sig, I think I'll start doing it again. FYI, its a paraphrase of the last part of a statement in by Pravin Lal in Sid Meyer's Alpha Centuari.

Heres the full text:
"As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last loose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
-- Commissioner Pravin Lal, "Librarian's Preface"

Re:Old sig (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21144279)

OMG. You're quoting from a computer game figure?! And I (European) are expected to be impressed by THAT? BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAA, Usians are so full of it, LOL. Insightful, yeah right.

But this is Europe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21140979)

All you america haters should be cheering because the US is the all-censoring, all-smothering, all-dictatorial country of the world. Europe is nirvana - land of the free where nothing but good is done and where the US should look to for its moral guidance.

Doesn't matter that it is being pulled back. Look at the EU - it is coming about without the free vote of citizens to make it happen. Elites who know best (like most people here on /.) will make it happen eventually because it doesn't allow any of that "american freedom" stuff that is the cause of so much pain in the world.

Enjoy while you figure out which end is up - morally.

lazy no good sacks of shit (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21141635)

They are lazy and all of europe knows it.

They can't keep a government longer than a pregnancy.

They do more coke than financial transactions.

Let them turn into the third world country they so long to be.

Yuo Fail It? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21143433)

these rules wiil you down. It was

Bullshit alarm just went off. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21144565)

How do you protect children from violence by banning a video of a child getting beat up?

Isn't that a bit like cleaning the floor of dogshit by banning a video of your dog shitting on the floor?

Ha ha ha ha that's really funny ... (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#21145737)

Italy wants to "censor" the Internet, do they? I guess they've forgotten that the United States already "controls" the Internet, and since we're the Home of the Brave and the Land of the Free there's no way we're gonna let the do it, so there.

it's been so long! (0)

DerWulf (782458) | more than 6 years ago | (#21146947)

It's been such a long time but finally, after an exhausting 72 years wait facism is back! Meanwhile millions of italian bloggers go by on scouters yelling "ciao!".

Re:it's been so long! (1)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 6 years ago | (#21148763)

Actually this is more like Internet-Fascism where crusty old Italian guys discusses what they think is right over pizza, pasta and a pretend-knowledge of the internet.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...