Google privacy convictions in Italy spark outrage

Suspended sentence for three execs over video posting is troubling, say privacy advocates

An Italian's judge's decision today to impose a six-month suspended jail sentence on Google 's global privacy counsel, Peter Fleischer, and two other company executives over a video showing the bullying of a disabled teenager has evoked outrage in the privacy community.

Privacy advocates in the U.S and Europe called the sentence extremely troubling and said it creates a dangerous precedent. The case is believed to be the first time a privacy executive has been held accountable for his firm's actions.

Italian Judge Oscar Magi in Milan imposed the sentence and fines for Fleischer, Google's chief legal officer David Drummond and George Reyes, a former Google board member. The three executives and a fourth Google officer had also been charged with criminal defamation, but were found innocent by the judge.

The case arose from the posting of a video on Google's Italian Web site in September 2006 that showed the bullying of an autistic boy by a group of teenagers in Turin. Under European law, ISPs are not responsible for third-party content, but are required to remove any content considered offensive if someone complains about it.

Google received two complaints about the three-minute video, including one from the Italian Interior Ministry, and promptly took it down less than 24 hours after it was posted.

In a blog post today, Matt Sucherman, Google's vice president and deputy general counsel for Europe, Middle East and Africa, noted that the company had worked with law enforcement authorities in Italy to help identify who had uploaded the video. "In these rare but unpleasant cases, that's where our involvement would normally end," Sucherman wrote.

The fact that the executives were still charged with violating Italy's privacy laws -- and convicted -- "sets a troubling precedent," said Trevor Hughes, executive director of the International Association of Privacy Professional (IAPP). What makes it especially troublesome is the fact that the video -- like other Google videos -- was posted almost certainly without the direct knowledge or consent of Fleischer or any of the other executives, he said.

"None of the individuals had any idea what was happening. None of them had acted either affirmatively or passively," to upload the video, he said. To hold them directly responsible "raises troubling questions about the liability of privacy professionals, and, really, any employee...about who is liable when user generated content is produced online."

Richard Thomas, the former Information Commissioner of the United Kingdom, called the decision "ridiculous," because it "brings privacy laws into disrepute.

"I cannot conceive that a similar case would result in a similar sentence in the U.K.," said Williams who is currently an advisor to the law firm of Hunton & William's Centre for Information Policy Leadership in London. "It seems to me very strange to convict individual directors who have nothing to do with the posting of the video."

He said it's interesting that the prosecution came not from Italy's data privacy and data protection authority, but from criminal prosecutors. "The body which is the specialist in privacy laws was not the prosecuting body," he said. "This conviction was secured in the name of privacy laws, but it was not brought by the privacy authority." He also said he hopes this would be a "one-off case."

Rocco Panetta, a partner with Italian law firm Studio Panetta & Associati in Rome, said it is important to understand the motivation behind the sentence before criticizing it. Though it's uncommon to have this kind of a punishment over a privacy violation, Italian data protection laws allow for it, Panetta said. The judge imposed essentially the minimum sentence available under the law for the kind of privacy violation Google executives were charged with.

The judge might have hoped to spark a "new discussion around the problem of free uploading of video with any controls or filters," Panetta said. "The problem here is we have an issue that is wider than the Google case."

The underlying issue is what kind of rules need to be in place to ensure that the right to free speech online doesn't infringe on privacy rights, he said. "That debate will be more important than the punishment in this case," he said.

Panetta added that it is certain that none of the executives who have been sentenced today will actually serve jail time.

Google's Sucherman, meanwhile, noted in his blog that the company will appeal this "astonishing" verdict. "In essence, this ruling means that employees of hosting platforms like Google Video are criminally responsible for content that users upload," he said. "It attacks the very principles of freedom on which the Internet is built," he noted.

Jaikumar Vijayan covers data security and privacy issues, financial services security and e-voting for Computerworld . Follow Jaikumar on Twitter at @jaivijayan or subscribe to Jaikumar's RSS feed . His e-mail address is jvijayan@computerworld.com .

Read more about privacy in Computerworld's Privacy Knowledge Center.

Join the newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.
Rocket to Success - Your 10 Tips for Smarter ERP System Selection

Tags privacyGoogle

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Jaikumar Vijayan

Computerworld (US)
Show Comments

Cool Tech

SanDisk MicroSDXC™ for Nintendo® Switch™

Learn more >

Breitling Superocean Heritage Chronographe 44

Learn more >

Toys for Boys

Family Friendly

Panasonic 4K UHD Blu-Ray Player and Full HD Recorder with Netflix - UBT1GL-K

Learn more >

Stocking Stuffer

Razer DeathAdder Expert Ergonomic Gaming Mouse

Learn more >

Christmas Gift Guide

Click for more ›

Most Popular Reviews

Latest Articles

Resources

PCW Evaluation Team

Edwina Hargreaves

WD My Cloud Home

I would recommend this device for families and small businesses who want one safe place to store all their important digital content and a way to easily share it with friends, family, business partners, or customers.

Walid Mikhael

Brother QL-820NWB Professional Label Printer

It’s easy to set up, it’s compact and quiet when printing and to top if off, the print quality is excellent. This is hands down the best printer I’ve used for printing labels.

Ben Ramsden

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

Brainstorming, innovation, problem solving, and negotiation have all become much more productive and valuable if people can easily collaborate in real time with minimal friction.

Sarah Ieroianni

Brother QL-820NWB Professional Label Printer

The print quality also does not disappoint, it’s clear, bold, doesn’t smudge and the text is perfectly sized.

Ratchada Dunn

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

The Huddle Board’s built in program; Sharp Touch Viewing software allows us to easily manipulate and edit our documents (jpegs and PDFs) all at the same time on the dashboard.

George Khoury

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

The biggest perks for me would be that it comes with easy to use and comprehensive programs that make the collaboration process a whole lot more intuitive and organic

Featured Content

Product Launch Showcase

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?