BreakingDailyEuropeFormula 1GeneralHotWorld

Google to censor pictures & Tape of ex F1 Boss Max Mosley’s sex Orgy, Photos / Breaking News

Google can not be more spread in Germany six sex photos of ex-motorsports boss Max Mosley.

The group called the verdict disturbing, while it is self-evident: In a constitutional state and corporations must respect the fundamental rights.

The Hamburg Regional Court ruled that Google may not show specifically named six photos in its search results in a particularly bad case of the invasion of privacy of an individual. Google called the verdict a “worrying signal” because the company must now monitor “even the smallest components of content.” That is nonsense. This judgment is a victory for fundamental rights.

In the debate over alleged censorship goes under completely, what is at stake in this case: Malicious perpetrators have a man secretly filmed with very private things. He has not done anything illegal, there is no legitimate public interest in ensuring that these photos are public. The case is similar to hundreds of thousands: Regularly publish perpetrators intimate private photos of other on the net. You want the person concerned to expose to harm, to enrich themselves.

Max-Mosley Dungeon

More than any man on earth, the former Formula One racing chief Max Mosley is trying to rewrite the rules that have governed the workings of a free Press for many years, not just in this country but throughout Europe.

His latest assault is on the internet giant Google. He has been trying to persuade a French court that the web engine should be prevented from directing users to pictures of a private orgy that he organised five years ago.

The photographs, involving Mr Mosley and five consensual prostitutes, were originally published by the now defunct News of the World in March 2008. It alleged that Mr Mosley had been engaged in a ‘sick Nazi orgy’. 

To the astonishment of many, three months later Mr Mosley won damages of £60,000 in the High Court from the paper, which was held to have invaded his privacy. 

Although German was spoken, uniforms worn and blood was shed by Mosley during the proceedings, and despite heads apparently being inspected as though for lice, the learned judge declared there was no evidence that this had been a Nazi orgy.

F1-Boss-Max-Mosley Dungeon-Orgy

Mr Justice Eady ruled that if it had been a Nazi orgy he might have found in favour of the newspaper, since Mr Mosley was a public figure of sorts whose suitability for his high-profile job would have been seriously called into question  by such antics. As there was no such proof, the paper was required to pay damages and costs.

Buoyed by this significant (and to my mind irrational) verdict, Mr Mosley set about trying to restrict the activities of the Press. In 2011 he argued in the European Court of Human Rights that ‘prior notification’ should be compulsory for newspapers, to give their targets time to obtain an injunction preventing publication.

In other words, a politician or businessman caught doing something wrong could try to persuade a sympathetic judge to kill off the story. Mercifully, the Court had a fit of good sense, and seven of its judges ruled that the right to freedom of expression would be at risk if ‘pre-notification’ was compulsory.

But Mr Mosley was, and is, a man obsessed. One way or another the Press must be curbed. His lawyers have just argued in front of French judges that Google should apply filters so that people would be unable to access photographs of his orgy.

Max-Mosley-Orgy

The unwary might suppose that this is perfectly reasonable. If the News of the World was, according to an English judge, guilty of invading Mr Mosley’s privacy when it originally published photographs of his orgy, why should those photographs be available on the net?

Google’s response is that the application of filters would amount to a form of censorship. Access to news sites carrying the pictures, or to innocuous articles containing the images, might be blocked.

In short, the prohibition would extend much further than the photographs.

If anything, Google is understating the case. Should Mr Mosley get his way, the consequence could be the rewriting or erasing of chunks of history. 

Whether or not his privacy was invaded, the photographs exist and no one has challenged their authenticity. They amount to a historical record of a sordid event which indubitably took place.

Decent people might wish that it hadn’t, but it did.

The women having orgy with Max Mosley
The women having orgy with Max Mosley

These images continue to exist not only on the net but in libraries and private homes. If they were wiped out on the internet — actually, they physically can’t be, but access to them can be denied — they would logically have to be destroyed wherever else they might survive. That sounds like a police state.

If Mr Mosley wins this battle, his next step might be to request that any articles which so much as referred to the pictures of his orgy, or the orgy itself, should also be destroyed, possibly including this one.

And then a thousand other people who want to rewrite their pasts would also apply to have access blocked to discreditable information about them on the internet. In fact, it’s already happening.

The European Union’s highest court is considering whether Spain’s privacy regulator may have overstepped the mark when trying to force Google to remove unflattering search results for numerous citizens — for example, a doctor who claimed that a 1991 news article about a dispute with a patient had damaged his business.

Of course, libellous or untrue articles can, and should, be taken off the net. Google says it has removed hundreds of such pages relating to Mr Mosley following requests from him.

Equally, the search engine should do much more to block access to extreme pornographic websites. But such a welcome move does not involve the rewriting of history to which Mr Mosley’s innovations would lead us.

max-mosley-sex-tape-video

It is understandable that the group does not want to . If passes through the case law of the Hamburg District Court , people will complain with similar problems . In different States courts decide otherwise might . Google’s business is a little more difficult . And sure some will try to take advantage of this jurisprudence , which are not only victims but also perpetrators. One can also banish contents of public interest from the public with the right to privacy .

But on something to decide in a constitutional state courts . It’s about the individual case , and the judge must consider , as in Hamburg. Six photos Google may not distribute, four others already . It is every time the question of how high outweighs the right to privacy of the persons concerned in a specific case .

If victims with the help of Google’s services are exposed, the company needs to do more than before. This is not censorship. On the contrary : It is reassuring that people can enforce their fundamental rights in court.

More

Related Articles

Bir yanıt yazın

Başa dön tuşu
Breaking News