Introduction of a ban on anonymous use of the Internet, a legislation proposal by the Chamber of Deputies of Italy











Automatically translated from http://documenti.camera.it/apps/commonServices/getDocumento.ashx?sezione=lavori&tipoDoc=testo_pdl&idlegislatura=17&codice=17PDL0055510)

Colleagues! The Internet has always been considered the last bulwark of freedom of thought, expression and opinion, given that by its very nature it is open to anyone and does not foresee particular formalities in the access or use of services. However, the internet, like most inventions and technological tools, can be used in a productive or destructive way. Unfortunately, there are many examples of the second type in the daily chronicle: news spread on the web without any criteria that offend the primary interests of the person (image, reputation and dignity), compromising even the right to oblivion. In fact, the digital age has also changed the sense of forgetting, designing a world in which all information is always relevant, always accessible and always available.

For more than a few years, we have been observing the constant evolution of false news, fake news or buffalo, which circulate at an impressive speed and which have already determined the reactions of France (where the initiatives have been taken by various media that have made a common front with Facebook) and Germany.

In particular, in Germany a law has just been passed that obliges social media to eliminate fake content within 24 hours of their detection, with fines of up to 5 million euros for platforms that have not taken sufficient action to eliminate false news and inappropriate content (such as those inciting hatred).

This evolution has certainly been facilitated not only by the diffusion of low cost processing systems and personal communication services (personal computer, internet network and e-mail), but also by the availability of a widespread communications network, easily accessible and usable as the Internet.

It is obvious that the peculiar characteristics of a network architecture system such as the Internet constitute an informative and communicative advantage that ensures a high level of information visibility and allows advertisers to legitimise themselves, virtually, as an existing but anonymous counterpart, therefore by definition not formally identifiable.

Unfortunately, it is not possible to assess as a risk or threat something that has not been previously identified; risk and threat only exist if they are known or known, since we cannot take any kind of countermeasure towards the unknown.

The issue of anonymity is therefore at stake: it is necessary to introduce a registration procedure that allows the competent authorities, in case of necessity, to obtain the recognition of an unknown individual whose potential suspicious behaviour on the Internet has been highlighted.

These considerations, as well as the absolute lack of global governance of the global village, have led to this legislative proposal, which consists of two articles.

Article 1 (1) prohibits the inclusion of online content of any kind anonymously. In order to counter anonymity, paragraph 2 obliges all digital platforms, not only those that today make up the giants of the Internet network, to register users through username, password, e-mail address and fiscal code. Once the registration procedure has been completed, the system must send an email confirming the registration to the e-mail address entered, through which the recipient, if different from the registered user, can make the appropriate notification. A fine of EUR 5 million is envisaged for digital platforms that do not do so.

The aim of the provision is to regulate the Internet network and, as a result, to obtain a "civilised" form of telematic space.

Article 2 provides for the possibility to request the removal from the web of defamatory content or personal data and information processed in violation of current legislation. In case of non-compliance, paragraph 2 provides for the right to apply to the judicial authorities and paragraph 3 extends this right to the heirs. There is also a derogation, in paragraph 4, for data whose publication has been carried out by a professional journalist, in the exercise of his profession and for the exclusive pursuit of the relative purposes, or by subjects registered in the list of publicists or in the register of practitioners. In this way, the bill aims to safeguard the informative purposes pursued by journalists with the processing of personal data of third parties. The dissemination of other people's data (in this case, publication) by these professionals is, in fact, subject to compliance with the code of conduct and presupposes respect for the principles of proportionality and not excessive, of inviolability with respect to the exercise of the journalistic duty of chronicle, of truthfulness of the facts and of real public interest in being informed about detailed aspects. Finally, in paragraph 5, a case is envisaged in which the right to oblivion prevails in comparison with the right to information: the telematic republication of old journalistic articles for which the user does not consider the public interest in information to exist at the time of republication.

The provision is intended to guarantee the frequently cited right to be forgotten, a highly topical institution which has recently become increasingly important following various rulings by the Court of Cassation and the entry into force of the European Regulation on the protection of personal data, which has fully transposed the principles underlying this right. According to the cited jurisprudence, the subject's right to claim that his past and personal events are publicly forgotten finds a limit only when there is the current and concrete usefulness of the news, which must, however, always be brought back within the limits of the "exhibition continence". For some time the Court of Cassation has been affirming that "a" right to oblivion "has been recognised, that is the right not to remain indefinitely exposed to further damage that the repeated publication of a piece of news may cause to honour and reputation, unless, for events that have taken place, the previous event returns to current events and a new public interest in information is reborn".

Finally, the proposed law also seeks to bring Italian legislation into line with the principles developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union, in the well-known decision on Google Spain, which has in fact "formalised" the right to oblivion as an expression of the right to privacy in personal matters circulated via the web that are no longer in the public interest.

If there are already examples of courts, including that of capital, which have applied the principles developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union in practice, now, more than ever, is the right time for politics to make a real contribution to regulating a phenomenon that cannot be left to the courts alone, without legislative intervention that is consistent with the times.

Art. 1.

Measures to counter anonymity online.

1. You may not anonymously enter on the Internet content in any form whatsoever, whether textual, audio, audiovisual or computer, including databases. Violation of the prohibition set forth in this paragraph shall be punished, if the act does not constitute a more serious offence, with a fine of 25,000 euros.

2. In order to counter anonymity, within three months from the date of entry into force of this law, IT platforms intended for publication or dissemination of information to the public must register users using the user's name, password, e-mail address and tax code. Once the registration procedure has been completed, the system must send an electronic message confirming the registration to the e-mail address entered, through which the recipient, if different from the registered user, can make the appropriate notification. The operator of the computer platform that violates the obligation provided for in this paragraph is punished with a fine of Euro 5 million.

Art. 2.

Right to oblivion.

1. Subjects whose images have been published or to whom have been attributed acts, thoughts or statements considered by them to be harmful to their dignity or contrary to truth may request that they be deleted, from Internet sites and search engines, defamatory content or personal data processed in violation of legal provisions and news about their person that do not have current relevance or reason of public interest.

2. In the event of refusal or omission to delete data, pursuant to Article 14 of Legislative Decree no. 70 of 9 April 2003, the interested party may ask the judicial or administrative authorities with supervisory functions to order the removal of images or data from Internet sites and search engines, or to prevent their further dissemination. If the judicial or administrative authority has ordered the removal or inhibited the further dissemination of the images or data, the operator of the site or search engine that refused or omitted the cancellation or that does not suspend the dissemination of the images or data is punished with a fine of 1 million euro.

3. In the event of the death of the person concerned, the rights and rights referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 may be exercised by the heirs or cohabiting partner.

4. In order to safeguard the right to information, the removal referred to in this article may not be requested in relation to the data published by a professional journalist in the exercise of his profession and for the exclusive pursuit of its purposes, or by the subjects registered in the list of publicists or in the register of practitioners referred to in Articles 26 and 33 of Law No. 69 of 3 February 1963, unless the act constitutes a crime established by a final judgment.

5. In the case of telematic republication of old articles by the subjects referred to in paragraph 4, the interested party who does not consider that there is, at the time of republication, the public interest in the information may request its removal pursuant to this article.