Approval of new Italian (Jesuit) law to introduce censorship in the Web - read the appeal of Italian Wikipedia:
Yet again, the independence of Italian Wikipedia is under threat.
The Italian Senate is discussing a bill on defamation (Bill #3491). If the bill is passed, it will require every website, including Wikipedia, to correct or delete contents merely upon request of anyone who believes to have been defamed or to have had his privacy violated — regardless of whether such contents are correct or not. Offenders could be charged with a crime and carry a fine of up to 100 000 euros. Such legislation has been unsuccessfully proposed in the past, but now its approval seems imminent.
Wikipedia recognizes the right of every individual to the safeguard of his reputation, and Wikipedia volunteers work daily to uphold that right. However, if this bill is passed, any statement in any article of Wikipedia could face mandatory deletion, on demand, in spite of being true.
This requirement would undermine Wikipedia's fundamental principles, it would be an unacceptable limitation to its independence, and an intimidating threat to the ongoing work of the 15 million volunteers scattered all around the world. They would have to shy away from articles about certain topics or people articles, "just not to get into any trouble".
Without any doubt Wikipedia is the greatest collective work in the history of mankind.
In the last twelve years, Wikipedia become part of daily habits of millions web users looking for a good source of knowledge, free of cost, and founded on principles of neutrality and freedom of speech.
The Italian Wikipedia has nearly one million articles, and it gets 16 million views a day, but this law could break down it all, forever.
The Free Encyclopedia is a monument to human knowledge, and a monument of human knowledge. So we will not allow its destruction.
Page of discussion about the law to be approved today [in Italian]:
"....."From all the sites will be deleted, upon request of the alleged defamation, that is without judgment, articles and personal information.
Do not tell me that I exaggerate: it is like Fahrenheit. Instead of burning books delete the words, it is a sophisticated form of burning of writing, as well as memory, history, holes are in the archives. Imagine that instead of an archive of Internet entered in a newspaper to burn microfilm. '
(Francesco Merlo. Stop the gag law. La Repubblica, 24 October 2012.)....."
"..........The main aspects of the law (subject to change in the meantime in the classroom) can be summarized as follows:
For the crime of libel, if certified by a judge, the current penalty (imprisonment from six months to three years or a fine of up to € 5,000) is replaced by a fine of 5,000 to 100,000 euro, subject to the claims in civil proceedings. There are penalties for the director, the publisher and the owner of the publication.
It is expressly extended to the internet crime of insult, that in case of offense against the honor or dignity of a person includes a fine of up to € 5,000.
For newspapers (which according to Guido Scorza, journalist and lecturer in computer law, are a "smoky definition lacks any concrete meaning") spread via internet we introduce the obligation to rectify, on request of the interested without comment and within 48 hours, a penalty of a high up to 25,000 euro. The obligation of rectification is extended, in different ways, even to the press which is not periodic.
Reform is the right to be forgotten, giving individuals and their heirs the right to impose on websites (everyone, not just to newspapers) and search engines to remove content deemed defamatory and personal information. The law does not exclude the application of this rule, the dissemination of news of public interest (eg. The prosecution of a politician). In case of default, the court may also order the removal by darkening of the site and order the manager to a fine of 5,000 to 100,000 euro.
IMHO such a law will not allow Wikipedia to still pursue the goals of completeness and neutrality that have made it successful, alienate contributors and make risky activities also patrolling.
Who will bear the burden of writing the politician X was convicted in 1995 for bribes or was rejected three times to maturity? Who will run the risk of adding to the voice on the car Y which has not passed the tests of road holding facts from this magazine? Anyone who wants to antagonize the supermodel Z writing that has not 25 years but 29? And who wikiferà these items, saving versions thereof containing facts that stakeholders may consider defamatory?
Above image - Mario Monti (red circle) at the Jesuit institute Leo XIII of Milano - from a post of Daniel Smith in "Nibiru2012": http://www.nibiru2012.it/forum/complotti/nuovo-ordine-mondiale-3358.840.html
Text for the law, from the site of the Italian Parliament - Senate: http://www.senato.it/service/PDF/PDFServer/BGT/00679457.pdf
initiative of Senators CHITI, GASPARRI, PALMIZIO, CECCANTI,
DEL VECCHIO, GHEDINI, SBARBATI, FOSSON, D'AMBROSIO LETTIERI,
CHIAROMONTE, IZZO, GIORDANO, CALIENDO, CASELLI, MARINARO,
VITA, RIZZOTTI, ASCIUTTI e GRILLO
PRESS THE BUREAU ON September 28, 2012
Amendments to Law 8 February 1948, n. 47, and the current penal code
(Amendments to Law 8 February 1948,
1. The law February 8, 1948, n. 47, are
make the following changes:
a) Article 12 is replaced by the following:
"Article 12. (Repair fine). - 1.
In the case of defamation committed with
the press, the victim can
asked, in addition compensation for damage to
Article 185 of the Penal Code,
a sum by way of compensation. the
sum is determined in relation to gravity
offense and dissemination of printed and
can not be less than € 30,000. '
b) Article 13 is replaced by the following:
"Article 13. - (Penalties for defamation). -
1. In the case of defamation committed with the
through the press, which consists in the attribution
of a fact determined, applies the
penalty of a fine of not less than 5,000 euro. "
(Amendments to the Criminal Code)
1. The Criminal Code makes the following
a) Article 57 is replaced by the following:
"Article 57. - (Offences committed by the means
the press, radio and television broadcasting
or other means of dissemination). - Save
responsibility of the author of the publication,
and except in cases of competition, the Director or the
deputy editor of the newspaper, the
magazine or newspaper, radiophonic or television, is liable for crimes committed
with the press, the spread
television or other means of dissemination
if the offense is a consequence of the failure to
control. The penalty is in all cases reduced
b) Article 594 is replaced by the following:
"Article 594. - (Insult). - Whoever offends
the honor or dignity of a person present
shall be punished by a fine of up to €
The same punishment on those who commit
made by telegraph, telephone
or electronically, or writings or drawings,
directed at the victim.
The penalties are increased if the offense
being committed in the presence of several persons ";
c) Article 595 is replaced by the following:
"Article 595. - (Defamation). - Whoever,
except for the cases specified in Article 594, communicating
with more people, injures others
reputation, shall be punished by a fine of up to
The penalty is increased if the offense is
the availability of a given fact. if
the offense went with the medium of print
or by any other means of advertising, or
public document, the penalty of
fine of up to € 5,000.
If the offense went to a political body,
administrative or judicial, or one of its
agency or authority established in
college, the penalties are increased. "
Original Wikipedia text:
ancora una volta l'indipendenza di Wikipedia è sotto minaccia.
In queste ore il Senato italiano sta discutendo un disegno di legge in materia di diffamazione (DDL n. 3491) che, se approvato, potrebbe imporre a ogni sito web (ivi compresa Wikipedia) la rettifica o la cancellazione dei propri contenuti dietro semplice richiesta di chi li ritenesse lesivi della propria immagine o anche della propria privacy, e prevede la condanna penale e sanzioni pecuniarie fino a 100.000 euro in caso di mancata rimozione. Simili iniziative non sono nuove, ma stavolta la loro approvazione sembra imminente.
Wikipedia riconosce il diritto alla tutela della reputazione di ognuno e i volontari che vi contribuiscono gratuitamente già si adoperano quotidianamente per garantirla. L'approvazione di questa norma, tuttavia, obbligherebbe ad alterare i contenuti indipendentemente dalla loro veridicità. Un simile obbligo snaturerebbe i principi fondamentali di Wikipedia, costituirebbe una limitazione inaccettabile alla sua autonomia e una pesante minaccia all'attività dei suoi 15 milioni di volontari sparsi in tutto il mondo, che sarebbero indotti a smettere di occuparsi di determinati argomenti o personaggi, anche solo per "non avere problemi".
Wikipedia è la più grande opera collettiva della storia del genere umano: in 12 anni è entrata a far parte delle abitudini di milioni di utenti della Rete in cerca di un sapere neutrale, gratuito e soprattutto libero. L'edizione in lingua italiana ha quasi un milione di voci, che ricevono 16 milioni di visite ogni giorno, ma questa norma potrebbe oscurarle per sempre.
L'Enciclopedia è patrimonio di tutti. Non permetteremo che scompaia. ".