Eu censoring the internet banning memes and freedom of speech

mark085

This is bananas there going to try tax links and only news channels can tell need this is the destruction of the internet simple as that

People me to speak out about this
What do you think

Franz Von Peppercorn

mark085 wrote: »

This is bananas there going to try tax links and only news channels can tell need this is the destruction of the internet simple as that

People me to speak out about this
What do you think

Link?

oscarBravo

Seems to be a panicky and overhyped reaction to the proposed Copyright Directive.

ancuncha

Wired article

limk to the proposal

Gbear

As I understand it there are two issues (article 11 and 13 of this new bill).

Article 11 - Link Taxes:

Including any snippet or content from a journalistic article when linking to it will now require a license.

The purpose of this is to provide a revenue stream to journalistic websites.

More info: https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/extra-copyright-for-news-sites/

Article 13 - Copyright Filters:

Requires the implementation of filters on websites to pre-sort through content to detect copyright material, including pieces of codes, if requested.

The purpose of this is to give content holders more control over their IP.

More info here:
https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/censorship-machines/

The links above are to the website of Julia Reda, MEP, and she lays out the problems that these elements of the new bill pose.

It'd be interesting to hear someone from Boards comment on this, because any content rights holder could ask the site to add their content to a filter and this could create extra expenses for the site.

In general IP and copyright are still being treated the same in the modern world as when they were largely concerned with tangible "stuff", rather than abstract, infinitely available, and therefore valueless, data.
There's been a huge push back from big businesses and some obsolete forms of media against online platforms because as their physical media streams - newspapers, DVDs, CDs and so on, dry up, they've found online platforms to not be making up the gap.

In essence, they're throwing a strop because they're obsolete, but because they have clout, they can bend the ear of governments and have their revenue artificially ringfenced. This sort of anti-capitalist, anti-consumer, corporate welfare should not, IMO, be tolerated.

Captain Obvious

Gbear wrote: »

As I understand it there are two issues (article 11 and 13 of this new bill).

Article 11 - Link Taxes:

Including any snippet or content from a journalistic article when linking to it will now require a license.

The purpose of this is to provide a revenue stream to journalistic websites.

More info: https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/extra-copyright-for-news-sites/

I understand why they are doing this. Print media is dying and people simply don't want to pay for news online. Real news has the potential of being buried. The question is how will host sites deal with it. Will they give open ended licences to drive traffic toward their site or will they demand payment and risk losing massive amounts of traffic?

Gbear wrote: »

Article 13 - Copyright Filters:

Requires the implementation of filters on websites to pre-sort through content to detect copyright material, including pieces of codes, if requested.

The purpose of this is to give content holders more control over their IP.

More info here:
https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/censorship-machines/

The links above are to the website of Julia Reda, MEP, and she lays out the problems that these elements of the new bill pose.

This system doesn't work on Youtube and I don't see why they expect any different from this bill. Youtube is plagued with false copyright claimers and abusers of fair use.

Varik

Spain and Germany both did something themselves, all that did was have News alligators close down. When it happen in Spain after the News media demanded it, google new shut down fully there. Funny thing is that the new media then demand that the government prevent google closing shop.

Youtube can barley get their content copyright detector working, how is the likes of boards going to do it. Likely no more uploading anything or linking.

Captain Obvious

I can see a lot of news sites running into trouble too. Like a particular Irish one that often rips content directly from other news sites and forums.

Leonard Hofstadter

Captain Obvious wrote: »

I can see a lot of news sites running into trouble too. Like a particular Irish one that often rips content directly from other news sites and forums.

Well if the EU is going to clamp down on that, then all the more reason why its continued existence is a good thing!

If it's the site I'm thinking of, they always have voucher competitions but I've never actually heard of anyone winning, also the owner's sister is a well known spokesperson for the Pro-Life movement.

dpd666

So, Is this not just going to kill discussion of the news. As in you cant link to a story or present a link from a news site to backup your opinion. I mean boards is all about presenting links to backup what you say or go home. How is discussion going to work after this passes.

fritzelly

Just another stupid EU law, lots of sites rely on content linking to drive traffic and actually encourage it
Now they want people to buy a licence to use it - how many sites are going to do this, how many sites could afford but I suppose you could charge a 1c fee but then that just negates the whole process.
Just another stupid law by stupid people to justify their existence and starts to set a precedent that the internet becomes a totally controlled environment by beaurocrats (remember all those sci-fi movies!)

BonnieSituation

mark085 wrote: »

This is bananas there going to try tax links and only news channels can tell need this is the destruction of the internet simple as that

People me to speak out about this
What do you think

What were your thoughts on Net Neutrality in the US? To me that's the bigger act of criminal behaviour from politicians.

fritzelly

BonnieSituation wrote: »

What were your thoughts on Net Neutrality in the US? To me that's the bigger act of criminal behaviour from politicians.

That was a different beast giving ISP's control over the internet

Jim2007

fritzelly wrote: »

Just another stupid EU law, lots of sites rely on content linking to drive traffic and actually encourage it

And these sites then earn advertising income on top of these links without paying a single cent to the original creators of the work. How exactly is that fair? Music royalties are collected in exactly the same way. Of course it’s a stupid law if you condone ripping of other people’s income!

dpd666

Jim2007 wrote: »

And these sites then earn advertising income on top of these links without paying a single cent to the original creators of the work. How exactly is that fair? Music royalties are collected in exactly the same way. Of course it’s a stupid law if you condone ripping of other people’s income!

clicking a link takes you to their platform...... So you would have never visited the site if not for clicking the link.

fritzelly

Jim2007 wrote: »

And these sites then earn advertising income on top of these links without paying a single cent to the original creators of the work. How exactly is that fair? Music royalties are collected in exactly the same way. Of course it’s a stupid law if you condone ripping of other people’s income!

Do you understand how content linking works? You are not ripping off the whole article, you give a bite of what it is about. There is a good chance you would never have visited the site without that link. I do such a thing lots of times when visiting my favourite sites and see something and think ooh I wanna read about that. Many sites have RSS feeds for such a purpose to drive traffic to their site from other sites.

Ever gone on YouTube and wondered where the past 6 hours went?

(slower to type than dpd666)

Varik

Jim2007 wrote: »

And these sites then earn advertising income on top of these links without paying a single cent to the original creators of the work. How exactly is that fair? Music royalties are collected in exactly the same way. Of course it’s a stupid law if you condone ripping of other people’s income!

Most just have the headline and the opening paragraph, you only see the full thing when you click on the link and go to the newpapers site.

Google news main way to use it now sorts news articles by the story.




Google it's self shows about the same level of information, Google just closed down their news services fully in Spain and Germany already and unlike then nothing here is limited to exclude google's search engine. Not much reason to pay someone else just for their sites to show in your search engine.

fritzelly

I like Google News Feed - it shows stuff I have enough interest in that I may very likely click thru to the main article to read while on the way to work in the morning. In fact there is probably stuff I would have missed without it like Koko dying (don't watch news on the TV, well very very rarely)

If they want the copyright one to work, they need to provide an incredible API with code snippets available for all languages so web developers can easily send off an image or whatever and get back a verification of its copyright status.

ancuncha

Deleted User wrote: »

If they want the copyright one to work, they need to provide an incredible API with code snippets available for all languages so web developers can easily send off an image or whatever and get back a verification of its copyright status.

This would have to happen to enforce this law, but this is the problem.

GDPR i think was great for privacy and giving power over data to users from companys. The privacy will be gone as every file, text wrote, emails etc that is used online would have to be monitored so it can be sourced for copy-write ownership.

The level of big brother always watching would be colossal

Infini

Think the real worry in all this less about 11 and more about Article 13 which could be the real issue not least because it's wholly overboard and unworkable but would become a major headache when inevitably abused by "Copyright Trolls".

Realistically it's only in it's early stages and there's strong awareness of this already. Will most likely say these article's will be either seriously ammended or deleted down the line as these could risk the whole thing failing otherwise.

VinLieger

Jim2007 wrote: »

And these sites then earn advertising income on top of these links without paying a single cent to the original creators of the work. How exactly is that fair? Music royalties are collected in exactly the same way. Of course it’s a stupid law if you condone ripping of other people’s income!

Oh look someone posting about copyright and the internet who doesn't know how the internet works, must be a politician.....

Jim2007

dpd666 wrote: »

clicking a link takes you to their platform...... So you would have never visited the site if not for clicking the link.

fritzelly wrote: »

Do you understand how content linking works?

Varik wrote: »

Most just have the headline and the opening paragraph, you only see the full thing when you click on the link and go to the newpapers site.

VinLieger wrote: »

Oh look someone posting about copyright and the internet who doesn't know how the internet works, must be a politician.....

I specifically said: advertising income on top of these links, for a reason. And if you guys think that links is the only way to earn income, then you have a lot to learn.

VinLieger

Jim2007 wrote: »

I specifically said: advertising income on top of these links, for a reason. And if you guys think that links is the only way to earn income, then you have a lot to learn.

They arent stealing any income by simply linking to it though. Your example of it being how the music industry works is completely incorrect.


Music royalties are collected when the music is played in its entirety which is of course fair, the correct analogy of the music industry compared to linking would be a radio station plays 5-10 seconds of the song and says "oh hey you should go and buy this song and listen to it, its really great" and then tells you exactly where to buy it.

BonnieSituation

fritzelly wrote: »

That was a different beast giving ISP's control over the internet

I know what it is that';s why I brought it up.