It often happens that the judgments concerning the new technologies do and do discuss the emerging need for new standards and consistent with governing legal knowledge and skill nodes opened by computer and electronically.

From this perspective seems especially emblematic a recent ruling regarding the on-line publishing. This is the Decision. 1095/2007 the Board of Administrative Justice for the Sicilian Region (which I published in full here ) that has denied the assimilation between traditional publishing and online publishing for the grant of the fees provided by law no. 416/1981 . The assumption of Judges Siciliani is simple: in spite of the Law. 62/2001 has extended the concept of editorial product so as to cover also the online publishing, it may not enjoy the benefits of the press law . The ruling, in fact, that "the granting of specific benefits should be explicitly set by law (in this case no. 416/1981) and that the interpreter does not have a general power to identify more recipients than those in meet the requirements of that Act. So a correct reading of the provision does not state that the granting of specific benefits can be extended beyond the forecast ". In short, because the 1981 Act did not provide (and could not be otherwise) publishing online if you do not change the rule can not extend to it the same benefits of the traditional one.

Motivation, which also has its own dignity legal, does not convince me at all. I do not think today it is still permissible to differentiate, to discriminate, by publishing the paper online ( here another example of "differential treatment"). Apart from the fact that the law already contains a broad notion of editorial product that refers to new technologies, it would certainly appeal was possible to interpret the standard evolutionary.

According to the judgment, the online publishing industry should expect a new provision which expressly extends the eligibility for benefits. In fact plans to reform the sector and have not missed much discussion in recent mesi.Il famous Bill Levi is a real puzzle. After being announced, harshly criticized and modified is never reached in Parliament and with the dissolution of parliament, could be made void.

A victory for all those who have harshly criticized, but surely the signal and the demonstration that the reform of publishing was not supported by adequate knowledge or belief, because the 'process that would lead to approval of the provision in fact has never started as shown by official records .

The idea that I have done is that since the legislature approaches to new technologies when it does so without a specific plan and, often, with " incompetence and improvisation ", would not be better interpreted with common sense rules that already exist?