[freenet-chat] Betting websites blocked in Italy

Tue Jun 27 13:27:31 UTC 2006

http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.12/italybetting

Italian ISPs are now required to block access to a number of betting
websites (the measures used are very primitive at present). One
interesting thing about this is that the list of blocked sites is
public.

I told you so, etc etc.

It seems increasingly likely that all illegal websites will be blocked
by ISPs in many countries in the near future. Of course they won't be
able to get all illegal websites, but if the process is mediated by such
unaccountable but state backed private companies as the Internet Watch
Foundation, then it won't even take a court order - it will probably
only take a threatening letter once we have a judgement to the effect
that the IWF is liable for not blocking copyrighted material on demand.

Material copyrighted by such as the Church of Scientology. Or the state.
Or for which there is any other obvious public interest. Or which is
libellous. Or which violates IPRED2 (aids, abets, incites infringement
of copyrights/patents/trademarks on a commercial scale; anonymous
censorship resistant filesharing may fall into this broad bucket)! The
best that can be hoped for is that legal or political supervision is
required for a block to be put in place...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Following a fierce battle between an authority of the Italian State and
private european online betting companies over their activity in Italy,
a big number of betting websites are officialy blocked for Italian
Internet users.

Everything began with the 2006 financial law (Law 266/2005) voted by the
Parliament under the outgoing Berlusconi government. The law included
four provisions - namely paragraph 535-58 of art.1 - which gave the
Amministrazione Autonoma dei Monopoli di Stato  (AAMS or Autonomous
Administration of State Monopolies, a part of the Ministry of Economy
and Finances) the power to bring to the attention of:
(a) providers of Internet services, or
(b) providers of other data or telecommunication networks, or
(c) entities that offer networks or telecommunication services in
relationship to (a) or (b), all those instances in which someone offers
games or bets where money can be lost or won without having the proper
authorization that is usually granted by AAMS itself.

Upon receiving such communication from the AAMS, the subjects from (a)
to (c) have the legal obligation to inhibit usage of the networks that
they manage or for which they provide betting and gaming services "by
adopting appropriate technical measures to this end".

The AAMS proceeded on 13 February 2006 to compile and publish a first
list of websites that should not be accessed from Italian networks.
Compliant ISPs generally implemented the restriction by "hijacking" DNS
communication and redirecting it to the DNS server of the AAMS. The end
result is that users trying to access such websites are instead getting
a notice saying that "pursuant to the decree of the AAMS of 7 February
2006 the requested website is not accessible because it does not have
the necessary authorizations for collecting bets in Italy".

Of course, reactions flocked in by all sides. Several betting companies,
including UK-based William Hill (which is included on the list of
blocked websites) announced they would recur to the European Court of
Justice for what they claim is blatant violation of the basic principles
of the European internal market.

The Remote Gambling Association immediately started to negotiate a
compromise with the Italian government, but until now no agreement seems
to have been reached.

Moreover, several Italian commentators noticed how poor the employed
system is from a technical point of view.  It is in fact sufficient in
most cases to remove the leading "www" prefix to access the blocked
websites. Other strategies, including the usage of web proxies, are
also possible.

The Italian chapter of ISOC (Internet Society) took a firm technical
position, considering that the proposed measures were ineffective and
in any case were far away from the "best practices" in the sector -
while at the same time noticing that the outcries of "censorship"
seemed misplaced because of the subject matter under discussion.

While ISOC explicitly chose to avoid the "censorship" argument, other
commentators argued that by blocking entire websites the proposed
solution ment in fact severely limiting the right of all Italian
citizens to access information, as granted by the Italian Constitution
and several international instruments. If the goal was to impede the
act of gambling then any measure should have been proportionate to
this specific goal. Impeding Italian citizens to access a website and
the information contained therein arguably is not.

One company, Malta-based Astrabet Bookmaker Ltd., went further and
requested the Second Section of the Civil Tribunal of Rome to declare
the measure illegitimate, insofar as it cut off Astrabet's website from
the Italian network.

On 10 April 2006 Judge Lorenzo Pontecorvo issued a writ by which it
ordered AAMS to immediately remove Astrabet from the "blacklist". In
his reasoning, Judge Pontecorvo touched on a number of interesting and
potential far-reaching issues, including how AAMS' right to grant
licenses only applies to the Italian territory, while Astrabet is
established in and operates from Malta and that the contract between
users and Astrabet, according to the facts and the law, is performed
in Malta. He also pointed out that according to the European
jurisprudence, blocking or limiting the activities of Astrabet
constitutes a violation of the "freedom to provide services" principle
as enshrined in the EU Treaty and that the claims by AAMS and others,
according to which Astrabet was guilty of "unfair competition" by
"diverting customers" to its website, is completely unfounded, since
Astrabet is simply providing services through the Net, "a reality
which cannot be ignored anymore".

AAMS counter-attacked by appealing the decision and refusing - for
technical reasons - to remove Astrabet from the blacklist. In an
official press release of 12 May 2006, AAMS wrote that the Astrabet
issue is "an isolated case" and that the Maltese company had "engaged
in non-ritual activities with the sole goal to obtain undeserved
privileges and behaviours which would be discriminatory towards other
subjects that are legally operating in Italy".

Although technically avoidable, the blacklist is apparently still
applied by Italian ISPs.

Italian Financial Law 266/2005 (in Italian only, 23.12.2005)
http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/guri/attocompleto?dataGazzetta=2005-12-29&redazione=005G0293&service=0&ConNote=2

AAMS list of websites to be blocked from 13 February 2006 (7.02.2006)
http://www.aams.it/site.php?page=20060213093814964&op=download

ISOC Italia position regarding the filtering of websites that offer
online gambling (in Italian only, 15.03.2006)
http://www.isoc.it/documenti/20060315_com_gambling.pdf

Civil Tribunal of Rome, Second Section, Ordinance (in Italian only,
10.04.2006)
http://www.ictlex.net/wp-content/TrRM060410.zip

Clarifications of AAMS on the AstraBet case (in Italian only,
12.05.2006)
http://www.aams.it/site.php?page=20060512175347713&op=download

(Contribution by Andrea Glorioso, consultant on digital policies -
Italy)
-- 
Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20060627/e0ae66c2/attachment.pgp 