EU Vote in Favour of Article 13

[Nowak]

5 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Most of them barely even know what the internet is, lol

Most of the people who voted in favor of this didn't even read it before voting.

 

Remember, kids! Money matters more than you do in politics!

[Doobeedoo]

Well this won't end well.

[Mihle]

It's less bad than it originally was.

[Thaldor]

1 hour ago, Nowak said:

Most of the people who voted in favor of this didn't even read it before voting.

Most of the people in the internet don't read the actual article, but prefer to believe that sensational media and youtubers tell the whole truth and especially Google is a trustworthy media outlet.

 

Only thing really changing is that Google and Facebook go batshit crazy because they can no longer use user content freely without paying users for it and they actaully cannot get around that with their normal TOS shit about "uploading you give us the right" anymore.

 

That part about making service providers accountable for user generated content is actually not that bad and with common sense logical. Main part of it (that Google wants to leave out for their propaganda) is that service providers will be held accountable if they haven't done all they can do to remove copyrighted material from their service. That "al lthey can do" doesn't also mean that every service should now have as sophisticated automatic filtering system as ContentID, it just means that companies must have system that is in line with how big they and their service is, no one expects some startup with couple hundred euros to build multi million euro content filtering system for their service, just handle takedown notices and everyone is happy (basicly just what DMCA forces to every company to do). Mainly this hurts Mega, Openload and other services that use DMCA takedown notices as toiletpaper.

 

Also memes aren't going anywhere except from services which have too stupid legal department that can't find the Fair use parts in EU legistation because there isn't Crayon doodled specific laws for that (they have been written in the copyright laws long before fair use laws were doodled in US because US congress was too stupid in the first place to make those laws into the actually copyright laws). So, single frame from a video or part of an image didn't become copyright infrengement, those boundaries were not touched. Yeah so Pepe wil lstill be a long time only meme taken to court and that was take nto the court only because Hitler jokes went too far and group which has hard time drawing that one symbol correctly took them too seriously.

 

In the other articles, it's now completely legal for national archieves to open their virtual doors and let people to enjoy their contents more freely. Also schools can now use digital content more freely in teaching without so much fears for copyright sues. There is boundaries but they are now a lot wider in many EU countries as these articles are included in national laws.

[poochyena]

Looks like Chinese citizens will soon have better internet access than Europeans.

[Lurick]

15 minutes ago, Thaldor said:

-snip-

So the 240+ companies who came out against it saying it would entrench Google, Facebook, etc. and hamper innovation, new startups, etc. are "sensational media"?

https://nextcloud.com/blog/130-eu-businesses-sign-open-letter-against-copyright-directive-art-11-13/

 

The independent musicians who say this is bunk because they have no real way to thrive because of Article 13 are just ignorant of the contents? The entire setup is to try to pressure internet companies into purchasing licenses, and it does that by basically saying, "if you don't buy a license for every piece of content, you will face crippling and impossible lawsuits." So how do they do that? Collection companies and large labels will take over, that's how. They'll gobble up all the little guys and squeeze them for every bit they can while shafting them on payments as they've been caught doing so before. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120323/18055718229/how-ascap-takes-money-successful-indie-artists-gives-it-to-giant-rock-stars.shtml

 

 

Perhaps the fact that all manner of sites like Reddit, Patreon, Twitch, Creative Commons, etc. are also saying how bad it is means they're just wrapped up in Google's propaganda? Perhaps the UN is just a Google pawn as well?

https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=24298&LangID=E

[CarlBar]

59 minutes ago, Thaldor said:

if they haven't done all they can do

 

And who gets to decide that. Your making an awfully big assumption that they'll consider for example content ID adequate or that they won't expect everyone to match Google from the outset.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, Thaldor said:

Most of the people in the internet don't read the actual article, but prefer to believe that sensational media and youtubers tell the whole truth and especially Google is a trustworthy media outlet.

 

Only thing really changing is that Google and Facebook go batshit crazy because they can no longer use user content freely without paying users for it and they actaully cannot get around that with their normal TOS shit about "uploading you give us the right" anymore.

 

That part about making service providers accountable for user generated content is actually not that bad and with common sense logical. Main part of it (that Google wants to leave out for their propaganda) is that service providers will be held accountable if they haven't done all they can do to remove copyrighted material from their service. That "al lthey can do" doesn't also mean that every service should now have as sophisticated automatic filtering system as ContentID, it just means that companies must have system that is in line with how big they and their service is, no one expects some startup with couple hundred euros to build multi million euro content filtering system for their service, just handle takedown notices and everyone is happy (basicly just what DMCA forces to every company to do). Mainly this hurts Mega, Openload and other services that use DMCA takedown notices as toiletpaper.

 

Also memes aren't going anywhere except from services which have too stupid legal department that can't find the Fair use parts in EU legistation because there isn't Crayon doodled specific laws for that (they have been written in the copyright laws long before fair use laws were doodled in US because US congress was too stupid in the first place to make those laws into the actually copyright laws). So, single frame from a video or part of an image didn't become copyright infrengement, those boundaries were not touched. Yeah so Pepe wil lstill be a long time only meme taken to court and that was take nto the court only because Hitler jokes went too far and group which has hard time drawing that one symbol correctly took them too seriously.

 

In the other articles, it's now completely legal for national archieves to open their virtual doors and let people to enjoy their contents more freely. Also schools can now use digital content more freely in teaching without so much fears for copyright sues. There is boundaries but they are now a lot wider in many EU countries as these articles are included in national laws.

I've given up trying to explain it to people,  the law is in black and white for everyone to read but people are too lazy and would rather read google propaganda and sensationalist media.

 

I don't even care what iteration they are up to now, I reed thee first two.  If people want to keep protesting shit they don't understand then they deserve all crap a poorly reworked law gives them. 

 

If people were genuinely worried about article 13 and 11 they would have read the articles themselves and done little bit more research than listen to lobby groups and google.

 

[Brooksie359]

16 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I've given up trying to explain it to people,  the law is in black and white for everyone to read but people are too lazy and would rather read google propaganda and sensationalist media.

 

I don't even care what iteration they are up to now, I reed thee first two.  If people want to keep protesting shit they don't understand then they deserve all crap a poorly reworked law gives them. 

 

If people were genuinely worried about article 13 and 11 they would have read the articles themselves and done little bit more research than listen to lobby groups and google.

 

Every single time you explained it you interpreted it differently than others. The wording is vague so to say we know exactly how it will be interpreted and enforced in court is simple incorrect. 

[mr moose]

9 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Every single time you explained it you interpreted it differently than others. The wording is vague so to say we know exactly how it will be interpreted and enforced in court is simple incorrect. 

perhaps you can quote directly form the law which part is vague?

[Stefan Payne]

3 minutes ago, mr moose said:

perhaps you can quote directly form the law which part is vague?

 

And especially this one:

But hey, you know it more/better than a real Copyright lawyer, right?!
If a real Copyright Lawyer says its vague and poorly written, I rather believe him...

[Brooksie359]

Just now, mr moose said:

perhaps you can quote directly form the law which part is vague?

We have had this argument already. Not going to waste the effort to have the same argument knowing it will just have the same outcome.

[mr moose]

Well done guys, couple of youtube videos and a quick withdrawal when asked for evidence.

 

There are literally thousands of articles and videos on this topic. pick which ever one supports your agenda and run with it.

[Trik'Stari]

It's almost as if the EU is a by-definition violation of national sovereignty, and every nation within it should be following the UK's lead.

 

Although do it more smoothly. Don't bungle it just because you're a party at odds with your own voters, trying to tank the exit from the EU because you'd like to stay and are likely getting paid to do so.

[Stefan Payne]

5 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Well done guys, couple of youtube videos and a quick withdrawal when asked for evidence.

Random Youtube videos, yeah, right.

 

Here the Website of "that guy":

https://leonardjfrench.com

 

You know that it is illegal to present yourself as a lawyer if you ain't one, right???

 

To make it more clear for you:

Quote

 If you are seeking legal help or legal representation you can contact the Law Firm of Leonard J. French here.

 

So could you accept that its a professional Oppionion and not some rando off the Internet that says the Law is not a law??? 
Its not black and white as you claim, that's just total bogus.

Edited March 26, 2019 by Stefan Payne
something added...

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Random Youtube videos, yeah, right.

 

Here the Website of "that guy":

https://leonardjfrench.com

 

You know that it is illegal to present yourself as a lawyer if you ain't one, right???

I know who he is, I never said they were "random" so don't put words in my mouth and don't cut out whole sentences as if they play no role in my message.

 

There is a reason I said this:

 

6 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

There are literally thousands of articles and videos on this topic. pick which ever one supports your agenda and run with it.

 

 

So carry on with your ranting.

[Salv8 (sam)]

it was nice knowing you memes, ill miss you most of all shaggy memes

[Brooksie359]

Just now, mr moose said:

Well done guys, couple of youtube videos and a quick withdrawal when asked for evidence.

 

There are literally thousands of articles and videos on this topic. pick which ever one supports your agenda and run with it.

I'm sorry but I believe Albert einstein once said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. I'm not insane so I will not get into another argument about this with you. 

[Sakkura]

1 hour ago, poochyena said:

Looks like Chinese citizens will soon have better internet access than Europeans.

Talk about hyperbole...

23 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

But hey, you know it more/better than a real Copyright lawyer, right?!

If a real Copyright Lawyer says its vague and poorly written, I rather believe him...

He's a US copyright lawyer who doesn't understand how EU law even works.

[Stefan Payne]

1 minute ago, Sakkura said:

He's a US copyright lawyer who doesn't understand how EU law even works.

That's why he's talking with people from the EU about that...

[Sakkura]

Just now, Stefan Payne said:

That's why he's talking with people from the EU about that...

You mean that's why people from the EU had to explain the basics to him.

 

The directive is written more vaguely than regular laws because it's a directive, not a regular law.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

40 minutes ago, mr moose said:

pick which ever one supports your agenda and run with it.

That's the way the modern world works, apparently. 

 

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

 

The final vote is in 2 weeks and so far it could go either way.  Even if it passes, it's up to the member states to turn it into national law within 2 years.  So no need to panic yet. 

I'm not sure how a company like (for example) Google is going to change search results (or YT content) per country, so they'll probably go for a single solution that covers every country's laws and implement it throughout the EU ... or worldwide.

 

My take on the whole subject : If the record companies etc support this directive, that's cause for concern.

I'll wait and see what happens. Once the new law is enforced we can always look for ways to circumvent it.

 

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to download Youtube while I still can.

[samcool55]

3 minutes ago, Captain Chaos said:

That's the way the modern world works, apparently. 

 

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

 

The final vote is in 2 weeks and so far it could go either way.  Even if it passes, it's up to the member states to turn it into national law within 2 years.  So no need to panic yet. 

I'm not sure how a company like (for example) Google is going to change search results (or YT content) per country, so they'll probably go for a single solution that covers every country's laws and implement it throughout the EU ... or worldwide.

 

My take on the whole subject : If the record companies etc support this directive, that's cause for concern.

I'll wait and see what happens. Once the new law is enforced we can always look for ways to circumvent it.

 

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to download Youtube while I still can.

Well YT already changes search results on an individual basis and video's that aren't available in your country don't appear easily in your search results and are basically gone in the list with video suggestions.

 

The confusing thing is that the big companies seem to be very divided on this topic, i think VEVO is a great example of this.

 

[cj09beira]

53 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

It's almost as if the EU is a by-definition violation of national sovereignty, and every nation within it should be following the UK's lead.

 

Although do it more smoothly. Don't bungle it just because you're a party at odds with your own voters, trying to tank the exit from the EU because you'd like to stay and are likely getting paid to do so.

did you hear what one of them said just a few weeks ago, it was something to the effect of "Why would you go to such lenghts just for that so called sovereignty" i was quite shocked to hear that, and he would probably be in trouble if that clip would be shown in the media, but that would never happen

[Nowak]

I got linked this Twitter thread by someone. Seems the parts that got people the most worried (namely upload filters) got removed, plus it adds a "fair use" exception for memes (yes, really) and copyrighted works that can no longer be legally obtained, among other things.

 

 

That isn't to say that it's perfect. We'll have to see how individual member states of the EU implement the rules and what rights holders try to pull, but most of the potential damage it can cause won't come from the laws but instead rights holders.