EU Internet at Risk

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, jagdtigger said:

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...

that is very true.

 

personally im a fan of the many regulations the EU imposes on people. 

 

ive not read through the details of the law and what these changes entail. these changes might be smaller than thought to be (see mr mooses post), or they can create a less open internet. this law might create attack vectors for ISPs to impose certain anti-consumer structures. im gonna keep an eye open for this, even though my country doesnt have an vote in the EU

[mr moose]

10 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

that is very true.

 

personally im a fan of the many regulations the EU imposes on people. 

 

ive not read through the details of the law and what these changes entail. these changes might be smaller than thought to be (see mr mooses post), or they can create a less open internet. this law might create attack vectors for ISPs to impose certain anti-consumer structures. im gonna keep an eye open for this, even though my country doesnt have an vote in the EU

I definitely haven't read into it enough to make a claim regarding the severity of these laws. But what I have read so far indicates it has no more teeth than current copyright law does anyway.    Anyway,  When I get time later I'll do more reading and see where we end up.

[samcool55]

Iirc years ago it failed because guys like Google went "wtf is this EU?"

The amount of censorship this could cause should be enough to block it. 

 

Also, they are going to get attacked from guys like Ubuntu, copyright doesn't always mean "you can't post this without my agreement".

And not every agreement is public, sometimes it's on a piece of paper or whatever.

 

If this law somehow becomes real, they'll quickly realise it's impossible to manage and the amount of time, work and money it costs doesn't add up.

[mr moose]

Still plowing my way through the hot air, piss and wind (it's a long arduous task to decipher),  So far it looks like they have made exclusions so organizations who's main purpose is not to provide access to copyrighted content (I.E ISP's, cloud storage and data encryption services) are not liable for copyright infringement.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

3 hours ago, Cheezdoodlez said:

 

And the politician mentioned in the quote might be slightly biased based on what party she represents. 

The Pirate Party tends to be the most reasonable when it comes to internet matters, though. I mean, it must be the only party with members that understand how to internet at all  

 

19 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

Iirc years ago it failed because guys like Google went "wtf is this EU?"

What you may recall is the so-called "Google tax", which was discussed on a country by country basis. The idea was to force Google to pay news outlets for aggregating their material into Google news. It was designed after copyright, meaning news outlets could no waive their rights to compensation. Only a few countries passed it, and at least in cases like Spain it ended up with Google News just shutting down in Spain, and news outlets experiencing reduced traffic as a result.

[samcool55]

3 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

What you may recall is the so-called "Google tax", which was discussed on a country by country basis. The idea was to force Google to pay news outlets for aggregating their material into Google news. It was designed after copyright, meaning news outlets could no waive their rights to compensation. Only a few countries passed it, and at least in cases like Spain it ended up with Google News just shutting down in Spain, and news outlets experiencing reduced traffic as a result.

Yeah, that was it.

Didn't know it's still a thing in some countries. Most news outlets are still crap so it's not like it made a big difference...

[mr moose]

7 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

The Pirate Party tends to be the most reasonable when it comes to internet matters, though. I mean, it must be the only party with members that understand how to internet at all  

 

I think most politicians have a fair understanding of how the internet works and the implications of their proposals,  It's just that they either don't care and want to bring in laws that cater to their *cough cough* ideals, or they have have different perspective on whats important to the future.

[matrix07012]

Quote

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.

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.

Mr Voss’ latest draft expands the scope of the censorship machines proposal to all web platforms (a) whose purpose is to “give access to copyrighted content uploaded by users” and which (b) “optimise” that content. What counts as optimising? Among a long list of actions, we find that “displaying” the uploads already makes platforms legally liable for any copyright infringement they may include (Recital 37a). And in his version, web services can’t even avoid liability by implementing upload filters.

To protect themselves from being sued, they would need to get licenses from all rightsholders that exist on the planet before allowing user uploads to go online, just in case the upload may contain (parts of) any of their works.He also claims that checking every new user upload for whether it includes one of hundreds or thousands of specific copyrighted works somehow does not constitute “general monitoring” (Recital 39), which would be forbidden – now that’s some wishful lawmaking.

https://archive.fo/FfM0l

[mr moose]

36 minutes ago, matrix07012 said:

https://archive.fo/FfM0l

Quote

To protect themselves from being sued, they would need to get licenses from all rightsholders that exist on the planet before allowing user uploads to go online

This is already law as afar as I know.  If a forum allows copyright content to be distributed from their server they are liable for legal action.
 

 

The directive to the Eu actually recommends that these requirements for "optional" filtering only apply to:

Quote

 

The services covered by this intervention are those

the main or one of

the main purposes of which is to provide access to a large amount of copyright

-protected

content uploaded by their users with the purpose of obtaining profit therefrom,

either directly

or indirectly

, by organising it and promoting it

in order to attract more

audiences

.

Organising and promoting content involves for example indexing the content, presenting it in

a certain manner and categorising it, as well as using targeted promotion on it.

 

Basically the service that this refers to has to be a service that not only hosts the content, but organizes it into searchable content, makes money from it and targets it to promote its use.  It does not by this definition mean any internet service with the ability for a user to upload content.

 

EDIT: not to say they won't be evil about it and just ignore the proposal for directive, because they are a government body and do what they want in the end anyway.

[Senzelian]

On 31.5.2018 at 9:56 AM, 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!

Are you greek? 

[Christophe Corazza]

7 minutes ago, Senzelian said:

Are you greek? 

 

Or Spanish for that matter? 

[Agonizel]

Let's not forget that the laws are rules that play mainly as guidelines. There is a disconnect between what's written in the book and what's effectively happening, so we shouldn't worry too much. However, if some laws are really obstructive to the "internet health", the EU will correct it, like it's doing right now. I think the EU will be flexible and re-calibrate their laws when necessary.

[Teddy07]

I really dislike the EU, to put it mildly. I hope it crashes. EU is totally corrupt

[asus killer]

There is a lot of hate for the EU, either by the British that hate France and Germany or by the countries that had financial problems, mostly caused by themselves, or even the usual countries that are in EU but always are against everything EU does.

 

EU ideas about copyright have also been a disaster but blaming EU as an institution is stupid, this crazy ideas and laws are pushed by the elected people on each country, most European countries have stupid ideas about copyright.  

 

I don't understand what GDPR has to do with discussion of copyright, as far as i know they are completely different things.

 

The video quoted in the OP post is titled "The EU is About to Destroy The Internet" and the video starts with "the video is not an exaggeration" . It can only be a good video without any biased, no need to see more.

 

 

 

21 minutes ago, Teddy07 said:

I really dislike the EU, to put it mildly. I hope it crashes. 

this coming from a German is some first class irony 

[mr moose]

8 minutes ago, asus killer said:

There is a lot of hate for the EU,

 

There is a lot of hate for various things on these forums.  People just don't how to look past the superficial and recognize the difference between hating something for ideological or personal reasons and hating something because it is demonstrably a failure/dangerous.

 

I personally have a slightly right lean to me when it comes to social intervention and political control, this leads me to not like many of the things the EU does. However I think people would have to be fairly immature in their understanding of governance and corporate functioning to believe the whole system is outright a failure or dangerous.

 

From what I've read so far this is mostly a storm in a tea cup.   A few people are getting their nickers in a knot because websites that survive using obvious copyright infringement are going to find it harder to defend themselves. 

[Lathlaer]

On 31.05.2018 at 1:22 PM, mr moose said:

Basically the service that this refers to has to be a service that not only hosts the content, but organizes it into searchable content, makes money from it and targets it to promote its use.  It does not by this definition mean any internet service with the ability for a user to upload content.

Yeah I think that upset fanfiction.net and archive of our own the most ;-)

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, Lathlaer said:

Yeah I think that upset fanfiction.net and archive of our own the most ;-)

I can see why fan-fiction sites would be nervous.  Mind you this is not the first time fan fiction has come under copyright infringement fire. 

 

Good read if you are into fanfiction:

http://www.trademarkandcopyrightlawblog.com/2016/10/10-copyright-cases-every-fan-fiction-writer-should-know-about/

 

I think (just my opinion) they will mostly be fine because copyright holders typically don't mind fan fiction, it keeps the fan base enthused.  

[Lathlaer]

10 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I think (just my opinion) they will mostly be fine because copyright holders typically don't mind fan fiction, it keeps the fan base enthused.  

Yea, I think from most prominent examples Anne Rice spoke strongly against fanfiction in her Vampire Chronicles universe which alienated her fans a bit. 

 

In most cases fanfiction keeps the franchise from oblivion and most authors are if not pro then at least not against. Unless you are JK Rowling. Then you can make another movie franchise, a stage play and whatnot to keep milking

[Rakanoth]

What is a link tax?

[Cole5]

Was nice knowing you guys! *waves at the EU people*

[Sakkura]

1 hour ago, asus killer said:

I don't understand what GDPR has to do with discussion of copyright, as far as i know they are completely different things.

If they end up having to scan and filter all content, that might clash with GDPR protections for personal data. But otherwise they're unrelated (and GDPR is mostly a good thing).

[Ryujin2003]

On 5/30/2018 at 7:33 PM, mr moose said:

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?

Would forum roleplaying be considered fan fiction and be copyright violation?

[Teddy07]

3 hours ago, asus killer said:

this coming from a German is some first class irony 

 

Could you explain, please? Thank you

My comment was:

Quote

I really dislike the EU, to put it mildly. I hope it crashes. 

 

[mr moose]

8 hours ago, Ryujin2003 said:

Would forum roleplaying be considered fan fiction and be copyright violation?

From my understanding any use of copyright material is copyright infringement.  However there are thresholds before it becomes obvious enough to warrant someones attention (considered CR infringement), and then on top of that there are thresholds within fair use defense that would permit a certain degree of use. The most important factors that have to be considered are:

 

-How close to the original work is it?  is it too generic (e.g vampires are generic while Dracula is not).

-Does it detract from the CR owners product (either financially or by reputation).

-Is it being monetized?

 

most copyright violations go nowhere when they are not monetized and do not effect the original product.   However like with all copyright, it is judged on a case by case basis,  there is no one concrete rule/threshold that applies to everyone.

 

 

[W-L]

Please remember to keep political discussions to a minimum and related to the original topic at hand. 

 

-Thread cleaned-