In view of recent high profile cases, the clash between freedom of expression and privacy has reached global prominence. In this paper, the case of the violation of the privacy of a bullied autistic youngster and the consequent prosecution of 3 Google executives will be discussed.
We will analyse the arguments made by both academic experts and pundits who agree with Google’s claim that if left unchallenged such a sentence would open the floodgates to several other jurisdictions that would as a consequence use it as a pretext to increase control on the internet, jeopardising in such a way free speech, which has been seen so far as an inalienable right which should not be censored. By going beyond the sentence and its immediate context, we will discuss the merits of casuistry for a Political Theory aiming at being relevant for public policy.
