For Cassation forums are not equivalent to the press
The laws in the press with its safeguards do not apply to discussions between users: the Supreme Court for the sequestration of messages on the forum is legitimate.
[ZEUS News - http://www.zeusnews.com - 11-03-2009]
A ruling by the Supreme Court makes clear the rights and obligations of those who runs an online forum: other than those provided for print and TV for less protection, but also for the lack of registration and appointment of legal responsibility.
"It is now confirmed that we are all less free" so the title's association with consumers aduc commenting the decision of the Cassation which does not recognize in the discussion forums online guarentigie the same - but also the same obligations - which they may be printed.
The story dates back to 2006 when, upon complaint of the Meter of Don Fortunato Di Noto, forums aduc were subjected to abduction, why the complaint was the presence of certain messages are accused of violating Article 403 of the Criminal Code (insult a confession by contempt for religious people).
Enter now to the question of the matter is now out of time: the forums were actually insults and phrases that definitely does not belong to anyone who knows how to make a civil and just did not need to deploy personnel on the offensive to defend their ideas, but by Here the complaint will probably run.
Approximately the same view was also aduc, which at that time presented a Parliamentary question - still waiting for answers - and a review of the measure aimed at achieving seizure dimming of the sun incriminating phrases rather than whole the Forum, the Association has been right on appeal, but is also used in Cassazione to get the seizure of the nine post also indicted.
The Supreme Court has stated that the forum "is simply a discussion area where users or registered users are free to express their thoughts but not for this forum is subject to the rules and obligations which they may be printed (as indicate a Director responsible for the registration of the head) or may benefit from the guarentigie on seizure that the Constitution reserves only to the press. " So the seizure was lawful.
The ruling is ambivalent: on the one hand, this could put an end to the ambitions of those who would like to extend to the whole Internet laws in the press, although in reality it is early to say, the Cassation, in the end, it was expressed on the forum without considering explicitly in other forms of expression, such as blogs.
On the other hand, the lack of "guarentigie" that allow journalists not to run into a complaint every three words exposes a part of the Internet at risk of being censured by a hitherto unimaginable ease.
Therefore, if the managers of the forums do not seem to be held accountable as published by the users, it is also true that because of actions of these same users may see suddenly closed its site.