Time to save the internet

Captain Obvious

In one week, the European Parliament will vote on new copyright rules that will effect the world wide web. Among the proposal are two particularly contentious ones.


The first one is Article 11. This is effectively a link tax which requires online services to purchase a license if they wish to allow any links to a "news service" on their site. This will be a big hit to forums such as Boards who will either have to purchase these licenses or disable links to a lot of sites in order to avoid steep penalties.


The second one is Article 13. This is a provision requiring online services to take steps to ensure copyright material is not posted on their sites. This is done by analysing all content posted and comparing it to an online database of copyright material. Anyone who has experience with YouTube copyright will know how disastrous this is. False flags are common. False claims too. YouTube is one of the biggest sites out there and even they cannot get this right after years of trying. Now imagine a more basic version of that system applied to every video, audio, image or quotation you post on a site. No memes, no satire, no critique.



Make no mistake, these provisions will kill small online service providers and will help nobody but giants like Facebook and Google as their smaller competitors are wiped out due to demands they simply cannot meet. Although it's worth noting that even these companies are against the provisions. These provisions will stifle political discussion, restrict freedom of expression and generally reduce the amount of good content available on the internet.



These laws were voted down narrowly the last time (318 to 278) after a big push to contact MEP's across Europe. Many admitted they had not even known about the provisions. This is how our MEP's voted.



3 in favour: Brian Hayes (FG), Deirdre Clune (FG), Séan Kelly(FG)

6 against: Liadh Ní Riada (SF), Luke ‘Ming’ Flanagan (Ind), Lynn Boylan (SF), Nessa Childers (Ind), Marian Harkin (Ind), Matt Carthy (SF)

2 non-voters: Brian Crowley (FF), Mairead McGuinness(FG)


If you want to contribute to fighting these provisions, the best thing to do is contact our MEP's and let them know you are firmly against the proposal. It has been made easy for you. Just follow the link below and use the simple form to send your message.


https://ie.saveyourinternet.eu/

Franz Von Peppercorn

Good one. Will send an email.

riffmongous

Where are these laws coming from, who is pushing them?

MentalMario

It'll also eradicate ****e sites like balls.ie and Joe.ie too though. Not all bad.

Atoms for Peace

riffmongous wrote: »

Where are these laws coming from, who is pushing them?

Who else? The man.

J. Marston

They're just gonna keep putting it to a vote until it gets through.

Harry Palmr

Eventually the web was going to be forced to pay for content rather than pilfer from content rich sites.

_Kaiser_

I haven't heard anything about this, so thanks for the heads up OP. Will send a mail tomorrow.

This is the problem with the EU. Who asked for this? Where are the citizens represented? I'd wager the vast majority of people have no idea who their MEP even is.

I agree with the above point though. The EU will just keep putting it up for a vote until they get the result they want.. We've seen that before ourselves.

Sooner this "union" dissolves and reverts back to a trade agreement the better IMO.

Malayalam

Are they seeking to do away with fair use rules?

My mep is voting against anyway not like those FG straights.

I'm a big fan of the creative commons movement, anything I make comes with cc licence, there is great stuff going on in that movement, this looks like an attempt to stem the tide, will really mess with free movement of ideas but ultimately it will succumb to the rush of sharing and exchange that cannot be stopped. Squares trying to hold onto the reins. Too late I think even if they do put in a speed bump it won't hold.

dxhound2005

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I haven't heard anything about this, so thanks for the heads up OP. Will send a mail tomorrow.

This is the problem with the EU. Who asked for this? Where are the citizens represented? I'd wager the vast majority of people have no idea who their MEP even is.

I agree with the above point though. The EU will just keep putting it up for a vote until they get the result they want.. We've seen that before ourselves.

Sooner this "union" dissolves and reverts back to a trade agreement the better IMO.

It didn't take you long to decide that you are against it.

pleas advice

I thought we saved the internet last week?

Amirani

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I haven't heard anything about this, so thanks for the heads up OP. Will send a mail tomorrow.

This is the problem with the EU. Who asked for this? Where are the citizens represented? I'd wager the vast majority of people have no idea who their MEP even is.

I agree with the above point though. The EU will just keep putting it up for a vote until they get the result they want.. We've seen that before ourselves.

Sooner this "union" dissolves and reverts back to a trade agreement the better IMO.

Ireland enacted draconian anti-internet laws itself not long ago.

The citizens are literally represented by MEPs, talk to them if you're not happy. If you don't know who you're MEP is, that's your problem.

Malayalam

dxhound2005 wrote: »

It didn't take you long to decide that you are against it.

Sometimes people can read a summary of a situation and be quick witted enough to grasp the implications on the spot. Length of time agonising doesn't necessarily add weight to an assessment.

Infini

Why am I not suprised to see FG's people making a bollocks of the internet yet again, don't they ever learn we don't approve of idiotic bullshít in this country or do we have to sic Paul Murphy on em again! C_C

dxhound2005

Malayalam wrote: »

Sometimes people can read a summary of a situation and be quick witted enough to grasp the implications on the spot. Length of time agonising doesn't necessarily add weight to an assessment.

Here is a summary of the proposals which I read.

Fair pay for work done by creative industry and news publishers

Copyright rules must be enforced on line, as well as in the “physical” world

Would you disagree with those objectives?

Malayalam

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Here is a summary of the proposals which I read.

Fair pay for work done by creative industry and news publishers

Copyright rules must be enforced on line, as well as in the “physical” world

Would you disagree with those objectives?

Yes

I'm more into copyleft freedom

That's my bag, and I say that as a content creator.

Captain Obvious

riffmongous wrote: »

Where are these laws coming from, who is pushing them?

Same people who push for laws against things like torrenting.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I haven't heard anything about this, so thanks for the heads up OP. Will send a mail tomorrow.

This is the problem with the EU. Who asked for this? Where are the citizens represented? I'd wager the vast majority of people have no idea who their MEP even is.

I agree with the above point though. The EU will just keep putting it up for a vote until they get the result they want.. We've seen that before ourselves.

Sooner this "union" dissolves and reverts back to a trade agreement the better IMO.

Nothing to do with our membership. If we weren't in the EU they'd be lobbying at national level. They did it when they convinced Sean Sherlock to introduce that law requiring ISPs to enforce copyright stuff. Only difference was he was able to do it off his own bat. At least the EU needs a vote on it.

Malayalam wrote: »

Are they seeking to do away with fair use rules?

If I go back to the YouTube thing, the system is so poor that if a big company wants to shut you up they simply file a copyright claim on your material and they basically go unchallenged.

zapitastas

When someone supports a political party is it necessary to have to support every single policy that their representatives vote in favour of?

RandomName2

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Here is a summary of the proposals which I read.

Fair pay for work done by creative industry and news publishers

Copyright rules must be enforced on line, as well as in the “physical” world

Would you disagree with those objectives?

Somehow I'm not surprised to see you defend the concept of arbitrary take-downs of online content by Disney.

The internet is all about the little guy, and laws like this are about putting most power in the hands of large corporations. The EU has never been interested in the little guy, and when it comes to the trade of physical goods, that's fine, but not when it comes to free-speech.

One eyed Jack

Malayalam wrote: »

Yes

I'm more into copyleft freedom

That's my bag, and I say that as a content creator.

That better not be the new term for “social media influencer” *glares*


:pac:

Seriously though, when they say take your internet back, my internet hasn’t gone anywhere. I could easily go back to BBS and I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it.

I guess it depends on what one uses the internet for. It’s not prohibiting original content creators from doing anything they weren’t doing before. It’s cutting out a lot of the chaff from the internet. Good.

gctest50

.

Malayalam

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That better not be the new term for “social media influencer” *glares*


:pac:

Seriously though, when they say take your internet back, my internet hasn’t gone anywhere. I could easily go back to BBS and I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it.

I guess it depends on what one uses the internet for. It’s not prohibiting original content creators from doing anything they weren’t doing before. It’s cutting out a lot of the chaff from the internet. Good.

Hehe far far from an influencer ....yuck.

Film, animation, etc.

Nina Paley is interesting in this area. It depends - if you want the world wide web to be just another market place and den of porn or if ideas and creativity have a value above and beyond merely filthy lucre. To give over the digital space to the corporations, advertisers, political manipulators and pimps seems a real pity to me when it could be so much more.

One eyed Jack

Malayalam wrote: »

Hehe far far from an influencer ....yuck.

Film, animation, etc.

Nina Paley is interesting in this area. It depends - if you want the world wide web to be just another market place and den of porn or if ideas and creativity have a value above and beyond merely filthy lucre. To give over the digital space to the corporations, advertisers, political manipulators and pimps seems a real pity to me when it could be so much more.

I think it really will be so much more if this goes through. I see rather the opposite view than giving over any space to corporations and so on. The digital space is only limited by one’s imagination, and that’s where the creativity forms original content. You’re probably more familiar with the idea than I am even but I’m seeing a huge “maker culture” developing in the States and sites like Pinterest and so on. That to me at least is original content and it’s creative, and it’s much more valuable to me at least than a bucketload of regurgitated memes and stuff nowadays that reminds me of the chain mail letters that used infest USENET in the 90’s!

Malayalam

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I think it really will be so much more if this goes through. I see rather the opposite view than giving over any space to corporations and so on. The digital space is only limited by one’s imagination, and that’s where the creativity forms original content. You’re probably more familiar with the idea than I am even but I’m seeing a huge “maker culture” developing in the States and sites like Pinterest and so on. That to me at least is original content and it’s creative, and it’s much more valuable to me at least than a bucketload of regurgitated memes and stuff nowadays that reminds me of the chain mail letters that used infest USENET in the 90’s!

It won't do that. Maker culture as you call it depends on the sharing of ideas and influence. All art is a form of well disguised theft, always has been. If people want to create restrictively they should not launch their babies into cyber space. Let them grasp their terrestrial hard copies and ply their trades to those they can reach on paper stands, in book shops, in galleries, theatres etc. Anyway big area, too tired to argue it. I've made my points and I don't mind what others think.

Franz Von Peppercorn

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I haven't heard anything about this, so thanks for the heads up OP. Will send a mail tomorrow.

This is the problem with the EU. Who asked for this? Where are the citizens represented? I'd wager the vast majority of people have no idea who their MEP even is.

I agree with the above point though. The EU will just keep putting it up for a vote until they get the result they want.. We've seen that before ourselves.

Sooner this "union" dissolves and reverts back to a trade agreement the better IMO.

I’m mostly a fan of the EU but were this to pass I’d be happy to see it dissolve. At least the first article mentioned regarding links.

It makes no sense anyway. Why wouldn’t news agencies want links to their stuff? That’s literally how they make money. If they want to hide behind a paywall they can do that too but they still need links to encourage traffic.

The only sponsors I can think of who would care are state owned news services.

I’m not a copyleft person. I don’t think people should make money from direct use of other people’s work. Derivatives or fan fiction should be protected though, leaving that distinction to the courts.