EU Internet at Risk

[SeriouslyMikey]

Something even bigger than Net Neutrality in the States. 

Quote

Today is GDPR day, and lots of people are waking up to a world in which EU regulations are having a widespread (and not always positive) impact on how the internet works. As we've detailed over the past couple of years, while there are many good ideas in the GDPR, there are also many ridiculously bad ones, combined with poorly thought out drafting, and we're already seeing some of the fallout from that. But, believe it or not, there's an even larger threat from the EU looming, and it's received precious little attention: the EU's new copyright reform proposal is set to be voted on next month and it will truly be disastrous to the internet. As it currently stands, it will require widespread censorship in the form of mandatory filtering and also link taxes that have already been shown to be harmful to news.

European Parliament member Julia Reda is sounding the alarm and asking people to speak out. As she notes, many of the folks now freaking out about the GDPR wish they got involved over two years ago when it was being debated. And if you're concerned about how problematic this new copyright reform will be for the internet, now is the time to speak out (yes, even if you're not in the EU):

http://copyright4creativity.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/DCDSM-Article13-C4CFactsheet.pdf

http://copybuzz.com/copyright/5-fundamental-flaws-censorship-filter/

https://openmedia.org/sites/default/files/stl-article13-faq.pdf

https://edri.org/eu-member-states-agree-on-monitoring-filtering-of-internet-uploads/

https://saveyourinternet.eu/about-this-campaign/

 

 

[elfensky]

Here's a reddit-post on this topic from /r/FanFiction, with a breakdown of the proposed law(s).

 

[Jtalk4456]

Just to warn you, this will have to be edited to include some of your own thought about it for the news section

[Mira Yurizaki]

Reading the TechDirt article first about the "Link Tax" law had me laughing at this part:

Quote

Belgium was the first country to try it, and Google responded by removing complaining publications from Google News. In response, the publications then complained that Google News was being mean to them, even though they were the ones complaining.

But reading about the... I guess basically "proactive DMCA takedown" thing (yes I know DMCA is a US-only thing), how is anyone going to enforce it? Is the EU going to force every damn website in the world to have some sort of "proactive copyright force" to make sure all uploads or user generated content are okay? I feel like that that point, everyone will go the Google route and just not bother servicing the EU.

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, ElfenSky said:

Here's a reddit-post on this topic from /r/FanFiction, with a breakdown of the proposed law(s).

 

I haven't read the reddit stuff nor looked into these new laws.  But fanfiction is already a copyright infringement in most countries.  It's just that most CR owners actually enjoy the PR they get from fan fiction so they don't file complaints.

 

I'd like to see the actual laws the EU are proposing/bringing in here.  Has anyone got a link to the actual EU law?

[Lathlaer]

6 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

how is anyone going to enforce it

The thing is, they don't really care about enforcement. You can have those filters or not. But if you don't, prepare to be held liable at any given time.

 

You don’t need to filter, but we’ll sue you if you don’t

The Bulgarian Presidency agrees with the Commission’s goal to force internet platforms to monitor all user uploads to try and detect copyright infringement, even though that will necessarily lead to takedowns of totally legal acts of expression. But they realise that putting that in plain writing violates existing EU law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

 

Their “solution”: Make platforms directly liable for all copyright infringements by their users, and then offer that they can avoid that unreasonable liability if they can show they’ve done everything in their power to prevent copyrighted content from appearing online – namely, by deploying upload filters (Article 13, paragraph 4). Which remain totally optional, of course! Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

[Mira Yurizaki]

1 minute ago, Lathlaer said:

The thing is, they don't really care about enforcement. You can have those filters or not. But if you don't, prepare to be held liable at any given time.

So if this were YouTube, its copyright violation robot will run its course before anything you upload can go live rather than after the fact.

[DeScruff]

Call me a little skeptical with these sources...
Mostly cause I can't say Ive ever heard of them, except for that Youtuber, whom I kinda recall being one of those loud right wing youtube channels which Ive come to take with a grain of salt with anything even remotely considered left wing.

[Christophe Corazza]

On 31-5-2018 at 1:19 AM, SeriouslyMikey said:

there are also many ridiculously bad ones, combined with poorly thought out drafting

 

As someone from Belgium (= EU), this sounds fairly familiar 

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Sypran said:

Call me a little skeptical with these sources...
Mostly cause I can't say Ive ever heard of them, except for that Youtuber, whom I kinda recall being one of those loud right wing youtube channels which Ive come to take with a grain of salt with anything even remotely considered left wing.

I want to see the actual law, not a journalists interpretation of it.  We all know lobby groups like to spin things, and when lobby groups become pseudo-journalists, things only get a little bit more removed from reality.  it might be true or it might just be a other greenpeace style blow up of irrational fear.

[Lathlaer]

5 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I want to see the actual law

http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8672-2018-INIT/en/pdf

 

Enjoy ;-)

[SpaceGhostC2C]

12 minutes ago, Sypran said:

Call me a little skeptical with these sources...
Mostly cause I can't say Ive ever heard of them, except for that Youtuber, whom I kinda recall being one of those loud right wing youtube channels which Ive come to take with a grain of salt with anything even remotely considered left wing.

Given the level of sensationalism in OP, I expected it to be The Sun or Bild... 

 

9 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I want to see the actual law, not a journalists interpretation of it.  

Being EU and copyright, I wouldn't be surprised if it is indeed stupid. However, I agree that "suspecting" and "knowing" are different things and require different levels of evidence.

I'd also love to know what these "ridiculously bad parts of GDPR" are...

[mr moose]

so I haven't gone to far in depth but it does seems at  odds with the claims many are making.  Particularly the bit about not holding content provider platforms liable where content is uploaded by users (not owners,) so long as appropriate measures been taken to avoid it occurring.  E.G if LTT can prove that they have been taking down cE content and any content linked was beyond their scope to prevent then they are not liable for that infringement. 

 

Quote

 

Taking into account the fact that online content sharing service providers give access to

content which is not uploaded by them but by their users, it is appropriate to provide that, for

cases where no authorisation has been obtained by the services and, for the purpose of this

Directive, they should not be liable for unauthorised acts in specific well-defined circumstances

, when they demonstrate that they have acted in a diligent manner with the

objective to prevent such unauthorised acts, without prejudice to remedies under

national law for cases other than liability for copyright infringements and to the

possibility for national courts or administrative authorities of issuing injunctions. In

particular, they should not be liable if some unauthorised content is available on their services

despite their best efforts to prevent its availability by applying effective and proportionate

measures based on the information provided by right holders. In addition, for these online

content sharing service providers not to be liable, they should also in any case, upon

notification by right holders of specific unauthorised works or other subject-matter, act

expeditiously to remove or disable access to these and make their best efforts to prevent their

future availability.

 

Sounds fairly reasonable to me.  They are just enforcing current CR laws and giving service providers a limited liability so long as they work with CR owners request (being that they are reasonable requests).

 

The first few paragraphs read a bit like the fair use policy adopted in the US.  That is that exemptions apply for research and education and cultural heritage preservation.  

 

I haven't got time to go into too much more depth right now, but I'll have a deeper look later.

[Rune]

Don't worry about it, the US will screw it first somehow.

[GoldenLag]

Does this affect the EU only or the EU economic and trade relations within the EU? Like Switzerland, Iceland and Norway

[Sfekke]

7 hours ago, Christophe Corazza said:

 

As someone from Belgium (= EU), this sounds fairly familiar :-D

Belgium is full of poorly thought out ideas and idiots talking about nothing accomplishing nothing all the while costing us the Belgians heaps of money. 

[GoldenLag]

6 minutes ago, Sfekke said:

Belgium is full of poorly thought out ideas and idiots talking about nothing accomplishing nothing all the while costing us the Belgians heaps of money. 

isnt that every country in the world? Especially the EU and US

[jagdtigger]

7 hours ago, Christophe Corazza said:

 

As someone from Belgium (= EU), this sounds fairly familiar :-D

At least your country isnt used for target practice for the "crime" of telling them the truth, that what they are doing is wrong and stupid....

[Cheezdoodlez]

7 hours ago, Sypran said:

Call me a little skeptical with these sources...
Mostly cause I can't say Ive ever heard of them, except for that Youtuber, whom I kinda recall being one of those loud right wing youtube channels which Ive come to take with a grain of salt with anything even remotely considered left wing.

 

And the politician mentioned in the quote might be slightly biased based on what party she represents. The first words on the Swedish wiki-page about The pirate party is roughly "Not to be confused with The Pirate Bureau or The Pirate Bay." 

[GoldenLag]

2 minutes ago, Tic-Tac said:

EU and all those bureaucrats needs to drown in their own shit ASAP. EU is dead, failed project from the begining. 

what makes it failed? i think they succeded in constructing a joint economy ending wars in europe

 

 

[NMS]

1 minute ago, GoldenLag said:

what makes it failed? i think they succeded in constructing a joint economy ending wars in europe

 

 

Shhh! Don't anger it further, it'll bite.

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, NMS said:

Shhh! Don't anger it further, it'll bite.

but im genuinly curious.

 

i bring matches to the flame wars, and not torches. i want warmth from the discussion, and not a wildfire

[Tic-Tac]

No, they succeded in constructing a blood sucking economic model that will help mainly or exclusively Germany, France, GB and Italy on expense of any other present or future EU state member. Those Brussels bastards deserve the fiercest death penalty!

[NMS]

5 minutes ago, Tic-Tac said:

No, they succeded in constructing a blood sucking economic model that will help mainly or exclusively Germany, France, GB and Italy on expense of any other present or future EU state member. Those Brussels bastards deserve the fiercest death penalty!

Alright, I'll bite. Knowing this is also against the rules...

 

Did your country get fucked when the Euro came in due to poor economy in the first place? Cause if so, blame yourself first, then others.

[jagdtigger]

20 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

not a wildfire

Unfortunately those also start with small things(like matches)... And the question is not about "can the flame become wild", but when it will get wild...