Many of you may remember the ' D'Alia amendment , which is the standard approved by the Senate as part of the so-called "security package" that attributed to the Minister the power to issue a decree that, in order to terminate the activities of apology of crime or criminal incitement to disobey the law or through the Internet, providers impose an obligation to use appropriate filtering tools.

There were many influential positions against this controversial rule and the potential devastating effects for the development of the Italian network as well as for freedom of expression .
Well, after much debate is the last hours of the news that, as part of ' ongoing review in the House of Representatives , the majority presented repealing amendment of Article. 60, in a nutshell D'Alia amendment should be deleted from the "security package".

The rule, we select to be dangerous, it was certainly open to criticism from the legal point of view. In a dossier of the Study Centre of the Chamber of Deputies on 24 April, on the compatibility with Community provisions, the law

The matter of the controls by the provider is also currently under Art. 17 of Legislative Decree no. 70/2003, implementing Directive 2000/31/EC on certain legal aspects of information society services in the internal market, with particular reference to electronic commerce. The said Article provides that the chief provider of network services (including the Access Provider) there is no general obligation to monitor the information it transmits or stores or general obligation actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity . The lender is required, however: a) to inform the judicial or administrative authority having supervisory functions, if it becomes aware of alleged illegal activities or information; b) provide, upon request of the competent authorities, the information in its possession to enable identification of the person receiving services, in order to detect and prevent illegal activities.

On the issue of advocates crime, then it is useful to recall the art. 10, paragraph 2, of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), generally interpreted by the European Court in the sense that the restriction of freedom of expression is allowed when the assumptions underlying them are precisely defined for law and have a legitimate purpose and when it is administered in a reasonable and does not result in a disproportionate sacrifice of freedom of expression.

Today the Constitutional Affairs and Justice Committees of the House will consider amendments, but - since the suppression D'Alia amendment was proposed by the majority - there should be no nasty surprises.

After the DDL Levi , the protest of the Web has managed to obtain another important result, for the future, any future proposals for legislation on the Internet should take into account the voice of the people of the Net