RR RUEHFL RUEHNP

DE RUEHRO #0125/01 0341628

ZNY CCCCC ZZH

R 031628Z FEB 10

FM AMEMBASSY ROME

TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3211

INFO RUEHFL/AMCONSUL FLORENCE 4007

RUEHMIL/AMCONSUL MILAN 0454

RUEHNP/AMCONSUL NAPLES 4237

RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC

RUEAHLC/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC

SIPDIS

STATE PLEASE PASS TO USTR FOR JENNIFER CHOE GROVES, ERIN

MCCONAHA, CHRISTOPHER WILSON

STATE PLEASE PASS TO PHILLIP VERVEER

STATE PLEASE PASS TO EEB/TPP/IPE FOR TOM O’KEEFE, JOELLEN

URBAN

COMMERCE PLEASE PASS TO SUSAN WILSON

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/03/2020

TAGS: ECPS, ETTC, KIPR, EINT, IT

SUBJECT: OPPONENTS OF ITALIAN INTERNET BILL SAY IT STIFLES

FREE SPEECH, THREATENS DEMOCRACY

REF: 09 ROME 0143

Classified By: Classified by DCM Elizabeth Dibble for
reasons 1.4 (b) a

nd (d)

1. (C) SUMMARY: Opponents of a new bill before Italian

parliament that would further regulate the Internet say it

endangers free speech and is a threat to Italian democracy.

The bill also appears to favor PM Berlusconi’s Mediaset

television service while disadvantaging Sky, one of its
major

competitors. The GOI says the bill is intended to implement

an EU directive that harmonizes media regulation and that
the

provisions being criticised are designed to establish
greater

protection of copyrighted material, to protect children from

inappropriate broadcasts, and to keep consumers from paying

twice by being subjected to excessive advertising on pay-TV

channels. Opponents say the law far exceeds the scope and

spirit of the EU law and severely restricts free expression

on the Internet. Due to advertising and content regulation

in the bill, some have read it as an effort to give

Berlusconi greater control over communication and to drive

out Mediaset’s competitors. Implementation of the bill has

been postponed from its original date of January 27 and

parliament is holding hearings on the matter. The GOI

appears open to discussion of the bill’s text. While

reaction to the bill has been strong among opposition

politicians and telecom professionals, the issue has not
made

it to the front pages of newspapers so there has been no

strong public reation. Despite GOI protestations, the bill

is troubling as it appears to have been written to give the

government enough leeway to block or censor any Internet

content. END SUMMARY

2. (SBU) According to the GOI, the Romani Bill (named for

Paolo Romani, Deputy Economic Development Minister, who

covers communications issues) is designed to implement EU

Directive 2007/65CE, which aims to harmonize media
regulation

in the EU. Many telecom sector professionals, however,

believe that the bill vastly exceeds the scope and spirit of

the EU law. The bill is complex, but there are three primary

areas of concern: limits to uploading on the Interet,

television advertising ceilings, and limits to content aimed

for adults, which would also restrict films judged by the

Italian rating system as being for those 14 and older. This

would likely include the vast majority if not all

U.S.-produced PG-13 movies.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

LIABILITY FOR VIDEO ON THE INTERNET

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

3. (U) Provisions contained in the bill would make Internet

service providers (ISPs), and hosting sites such as Blogspot

and YouTube, liable for content in the same way a television

station is. In the strictest interpretation of the law, the

sites and ISPs would have to monitor all content on their

sites, content which is uploaded by millions of individual

users. This is widely viewed as impossible both in practical

and economic terms. The Italian Communications Authority

(AGCOM) would be responsible for oversight of the law, and

some have interpreted the bill as requiring government

permission before a video could be uploaded.

4. (C) Antonello Busetto, director of institutional
relations

for Confindustria Servizi Innovativi e Tecnologici, a

business association representing the interests of IT

companies, said the measure would mean “the death of the

Internet in Italy.”

5. (U) Italian communications commissioner Nicola D’Angelo

was quoted in the press as saying, “Italy will be the only

Western country in which it is necessary to have prior

government permission to operate this kind of service…This

aspect reveals a democratic risk, regardless of who happens

to be in power.” Likewise, AGCOM president Corrado Calabro

has said that Italy would be unique in the West as imposing

Internet restrictions until now only imposed by
authoritarian

governments.

6. (SBU) The GOI says the measure is aimed at protecting

copyrighted material from being uploaded and downloaded

ROME 00000125 002 OF 003
illegally, as well as at monitoring other potentially
illegal

activity on the Internet. The copyright industry has

expressed some limited approval of the bill. Enzo Mazza,

president of the Italian Music Federation, said the music

industry is generally in favor of making ISPs and sites more

responsible for protecting copyrighted material, though, he

added that his industry’s analysis of the bill was focused
on

this aspect and not other implications.

7. (SBU) Because this could make ISPs and opinion sites

liable for defamation in the way television broadcasts are,

some see this as an effort to control political discourse on

the Internet. Others see a commercial angle aimed at
limiting

the video and TV available on the Internet as Mediaset moves

into the Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) market.

Alessandro Gilioli, who writes a blog for the liberal weekly

magazine Espresso wrote “It’s the Berlusconi method: Kill

your potential enemies while they are small. That’s why

anyone doing Web TV — even from their attic at home — must

get ministerial approval and fulfill a host of other

bureaucratic obligations.”

8. (SBU) AGCOM would have the authority to enforce the law.

Among the authority’s powers would be the ability to block

traffic into Italy of sites whose content did not meet the

requirements of the law. For example, YouTube could be

blocked because the content was not uploaded with government

approval. AGCOM would also be able to levy fines of up to

150,000 euros against foreign companies violating the law.

Though AGCOM is theoretically an independent agency, many

fear that it may not be strong enough to resist political

pressure.

– – – – – – – – – – –

ADVERTISING CEILINGS

– – – – – – – – – – –

9. (C) The bill would place limits on advertising on pay-TV

channels that exceed the EU directive. It would reduce the

EU ceiling of 20% to 12% in Italy by 2012. The provision

would penalize Sky in particular. Some argue that the

measure is designed to favor PM Berlusconi’s free-to-air

Mediaset channels, which would not be subject to the limit.

Mediaset’s pay channels would be subject to the advertising

ceiling, but Mediaset’s channels currently have less than
12%

each hour dedicated to ads. In addition, reducing the

overall possibility to advertise on pay-TV would push

advertising towards free channels operated by Mediaset and
by

the Italian state network RAI. Busetto said this would allow

Berlusconi to earn more money and also to exercise greater

control of public information.

– – – – – – – – –

ADULT CONTENT

– – – – – – – – –

10. (SBU) The bill places stringent time restrictions on

broadcasting of so-called “adult content,” virtually

prohibiting it between 7 a.m. and 11 p.m. Pay channels such

as those offered by Sky would be subject to the restrictions;

it appears pay-per-view content would be as well. Because

they obtain a significant part of their income from pay
adult

content, pay-TV would suffer financially from this

restriction. The bill would limit broadcast of any film

rated for viewers above age 14 to after 10:30 p.m. One press

report said this would make films such as Saturday Night

Fever unavailable until late-night. Again, some opponents

worry that the objective is to hurt Mediaset’s competition.

– – – – – – – –

EU OPINION

– – – – – – – –

11. (U) Opinion at the EU appears to be conflicting.

According to press reports, the EU is threatening to start
an

infraction procedure against Italy for failing to swiftly

implement the media directive. At the same time, other press

reports say the restrictions in the Italian bill would

likely violate the EU e-commerce directive.

– – – – – – –

ROME 00000125 003 OF 003
COMMENT

– – – – – – –

12. (C) In official statements the government insists the

bill is in no way intended to stifle free speech. Opponents

are vocal and using alarmist language, but outside of
telecom

industries their numbers appear to be small. There has been

no visible public outrage, and even Beppe Grillo, a public

personality usually outspoken about government regulation,

especially that involving the Internet, has said very little.

13. (C) After Berlusconi was attacked in Milan in December

and a Facebook fan page for his attacker quickly amassed

fans, the GOI expressed the need for regulation of social

networking sites. At that time, Romani said the government

would work with ISPs and sites to develop a method of

self-regulation and that there would be no attempt to

legislate internet content. Despite Romani’s prior

statements, this bill appears to have been written to give

the government enough leeway to block or censor any Internet

content it deems defamatory or to be encouraging criminal

activity.

14. (C) For years, the USG has urged the GOI to take action

to protect copyrighted material on the Internet, in

particular encouraging the establishment of clear

notice-and-takedown procedures and cooperation among rights

holders and ISPs to prevent illegal filesharing. Italy has

done very little. Now, this bill skips over collaboration,

and suddenly moves directly to very stern regulation. In

light of its reluctance to take action on this issue in the

past, and also given the many commercial advantages that
this

law appears to give Mediaset and state TV, the GOI claim
that

Internet provisions of this law are aimed at copyright

protection alone are suspect.

15. (C) In all liklihood, if this bill were to become law as

it is currently written, little would change immediately in

the way Internet sites operate in Italy, and the average
11th

grader uploading video to his blog would never be targeted

for legal action. It would, however, provide a basis for

legal actions against media operators that proved to be

commercial or political competition for government figures.

Over the last three years we have seen several GOI efforts
to

exert control over the Internet, including one infamous

effort to require bloggers to obtain GOI journalism licenses.

16. (C) Advocates of Internet freedom have repeatedly warned

us that Italy’s traditional elites — on both sides of the

political spectrum — are very uncomfortable with the

Internet’s ability to bypass the traditional media that they

control. Becasue this new bill seems to address these kinds

of concerns, and because it also serves Berlusconi’s
business

interests, it is conceivable that this seemingly improbable

legislation might actually come into force in Italy. We note

that officers from SKY have told us that Deputy GOI Minister

Romani (for whom the new bill is named) has been leading

efforts within the GOI to help Berlusconi’s Mediaset and to

put SKY at a disadvantage. This represents a familiar

pattern: Berslusoni and Mediaset have been using government

power in this way ever since the days of Prime Minister

Bettino Craxi. In addition, this bill would set precidents

that nations such as china could copy or cite as

justification for their own crackdowns on free speech.

THORNE