tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33445632.post5894509273873741252..comments2024-01-20T11:56:48.682+01:00Comments on WindRose Hotel: Google convicted: it was the profit's faultS.R. Piccolihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15622464895435470724noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33445632.post-3925201389157920982010-04-17T18:09:19.178+02:002010-04-17T18:09:19.178+02:00I'm making a general allusion to those who wou...I'm making a general allusion to those who would be directly responsable for excercising the right, for example, to print a photograph of the last moments in action of a young American soldier who has been terribly wounded, despite soldier's family's pleas not to go ahead. <br /><br />In this particular case I fully agree. I don't see how Google can be held indirectly responsable for the faults of others.Mirinohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14762774089637304953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33445632.post-38280194171503579412010-04-17T15:34:45.229+02:002010-04-17T15:34:45.229+02:00What we must bear in mind is that the three Google...What we must bear in mind is that the three Google executives did not film the video in question, they did not upload it and they did not see it. They cannot be held penally responsible for illegal activities committed by third parties: responsibility must lie with whoever uploads a video to the web—if this basic principle is not respected, there are very few possibilities of offering services on internet.<br /><br /><i>”earning money from publicity placed alongside articles, photographs or videos of sensitive or immoral issues can't be considered ethically correct.”</i><br /><br />This is right in principle, without a doubt, but does not apply to this particular case, unless we think that we can do without the Internet and the many websites and hosting platforms which offer user-generated content. It’s a matter of common sense, first and foremost, not of literal interpretation of laws and juridical principles, nor of juridical formalism. <i>Summum jus, summa injuria</i>, as our ancestors used to say…S.R. Piccolihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15622464895435470724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33445632.post-52467877308530915292010-04-17T10:12:02.958+02:002010-04-17T10:12:02.958+02:00It should go without saying that the liberty of ex...It should go without saying that the liberty of expression is no longer a liberty when it encroaches on the liberty of others, causing pain, injustice, defamation and copyright infringement.<br /><br />This doesn't necessarily apply here, although earning money from publicity placed alongside articles, photographs or videos of sensitive or immoral issues can't be considered ethically correct.<br /><br />Should anyone be interested, I could cite two obvious examples of what could and maybe should be considered criminal acts of assuming the right of liberty of expression, grossly infringing on the right of liberty of others and callously causing unnecessary, additional pain and harm.Mirinohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14762774089637304953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33445632.post-32247895104335602102010-04-14T17:33:34.818+02:002010-04-14T17:33:34.818+02:00sounds pretty anti-American....sounds pretty anti-American....Hans-Hermannhttp://www.spiegel.de/international/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33445632.post-41747281100633960672010-04-14T16:47:55.613+02:002010-04-14T16:47:55.613+02:00Someone wrote that "Google should remove ever...Someone wrote that "Google should remove everything from Italy and refuse to allow their services to go directly into Italy via IP filtering." Well, I'm afraid he's right, but I hope this won't happen, for the sake of my friends over there...walthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18329081901811262531noreply@blogger.com