Confesso che la considerazione:

This means that Member States wishing to easily delegate such activity to an administration should re-think their plans (this is for instance the case of the Italian copyright enforcement reform)

mi pare un poco forzata.

Vi sono nelle considerazioni dell’Avvocato Generale alcuni passaggi utili per argomentare “contro” AGCOM ( ma per questo basta leggere le norme...), ma la deduzione riportata nel Blog citato da Stefano, ad esser intellettualmente onesti, mi pare eccessiva.

C.

-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: nexa-bounces@server-nexa.polito.it [mailto:nexa-bounces@server-nexa.polito.it] Per conto di Stefano Quintarelli
Inviato: martedì 26 novembre 2013 14.05
A: A Dicorinto; oreste.pollicino
Cc: nexa; nexa-bounces; nexa-request
Oggetto: Re: [nexa] ISP e diritto d'autore (conclusioni C-314/12)

http://is.gd/tBcdQy

-       the Attorney General stresses that fact that web-blocking is

subject to law reservation and should be pursued and reviewed by courts.

This means that Member States wishing to easily delegate such activity

to an administration should re-think their plans (this is for instance

the case of the Italian copyright enforcement reform);

-       since important rights like freedom of speech, privacy, freedom

of business ecc must be guaranteed, some national judges my come to the

conclusions, in the concrete circumstances, that web-blocking is an

excessive and inadequate measure; I believe that DPI (deep packet

inspection) will not be tolerated by national courts;

-       courts can neither impose general web-blocking measures nor an

“result obligation”: in other words, the web-blocking decision should

specifically indicate the technological measures to be undertaken, it

cannot consist in a just an order to block access to a certain website,

leaving to the ISPs the liability about the effectiviness of the adopted

measure.

ciao, s.

On 26/11/2013 13:45, A Dicorinto wrote:

> Oh, yeah!

> http://www.repubblica.it/tecnologia/2013/11/26/news/provider_chiusura_sito-71981938/?ref=HREC1-6

>

>

> 2013/11/26 oreste.pollicino <oreste.pollicino@unibocconi.it>

>

>>

>> According to Advocate General Cruz Villalón an internet provider can be

>> required to

>> block access by its customers to a website which infringes copyright

>> Such a court injunction must refer to specific blocking measures and

>> achieve an appropriate

>> balance between the opposing interests which are protected by fundamental

>> rights

>>

>>

>> continua qui

>>

>>

>> http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2013-11/cp130149en.pdf

>> _______________________________________________

>> nexa mailing list

>> nexa@server-nexa.polito.it

>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

>>

>

>

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> nexa mailing list

> nexa@server-nexa.polito.it

> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

>

--

conf room: http://quinta.quivideo.it

blog: http://blog.quintarelli.it

tumblr: http://stefanoquintarelli.tumblr.com

bitmessage id: BM-2DC6u7NoBoBwSEzX7C8iPjJNrAmZT5s3ms

_______________________________________________

nexa mailing list

nexa@server-nexa.polito.it

https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa