EU copyright Directive article 13

[Eye of Horus]

Good! :)

[SidheLady]

Thank Gods

[Lilias]

I saw a lot of organised pushback against this over the last few weeks from my little corner of the fandom community. Hopefully, those responsible for redrafting it will now be at least familiar with the concepts of derivative and transformative works.

[Sain]

The last redraft was starting to look better already, but it is great they still shut it down. Hopefully the new one will be more for the people :-)

[gaggedLouise]

The directive, with article 13 in a revised (softened) form, has been passed by the EUP - it will still have to go through a phase of editing into law though, and after that, it will essentially be up to each member country how far they will go with it, how to integrate it into their own codes of law.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/12/eu-lawmakers-pass-controversial-digital-copyright-law.html

[Nachtmahr]

The directive, with article 13 in a revised (softened) form, has been passed by the EUP - it will still have to go through a phase of editing into law though, and after that, it will essentially be up to each member country how far they will go with it, how to integrate it into their own codes of law.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/12/eu-lawmakers-pass-controversial-digital-copyright-law.html

And people wonder what's up with the resistance and resentment toward the EU while the "parliament" there keeps votes in favor of laws that are enormously unpopular in the countries they're meant to represent. It's votes like this that make the EU look as much like a supernational corporate free-for-all as the US government these days. As regular citizens, there's virtually nothing we can do to resist this. It's despicable. I might not quite be a Leave-enthusiast yet, but when proposals like these pass it becomes even more clear that we all (Europeans) need to sit down and have a very long and tough debate about the future of this alleged "union" of ours.

I'm absolutely livid. But at least this will be a real example of EU overreach and why we need to reconsider our approach to it. Now we've got a long and hard fight ahead of us to try and minimize the damage done by this, assuming we can't eliminate it entirely before it goes live.

[Lilias]

The final vote will be in January. Pester your MEPs.

[Nachtmahr]

The final vote will be in January. Pester your MEPs.

I intend to do whatever I can, sadly the tone among our representatives has been one of either absolute silence or outright mockery of this law's opponents.

[Lilias]

I intend to do whatever I can, sadly the tone among our representatives has been one of either absolute silence or outright mockery of this law's opponents.

If enough people suggest that they risk never being elected again, the tone could change. I don't know how approachable your reps are, but in the UK they get regularly roasted by the public on live TV. Too bad that this is not a case where pressure can be applied.

[Missy]

It really doesn't mater, money is what gets you elected and as long as the corporations have more money than the citizens, society will always be oligarchic.

[Sain]

Copyright negotiations hit a brick wall in Council - Julia Reda, European Parlament Pirate.

Kind of uplifting to see that this might be the effect of the outcry from people. Not entirely sure what this means now in practice, but will probably dig through some more politically savvy people's thoughts to get an idea tomorrow.

[Nachtmahr]

Copyright negotiations hit a brick wall in Council - Julia Reda, European Parlament Pirate.

Kind of uplifting to see that this might be the effect of the outcry from people. Not entirely sure what this means now in practice, but will probably dig through some more politically savvy people's thoughts to get an idea tomorrow.

What I gather from the article, EU politics not exactly being my field of expertise, is that more government officials might have come to the realization, either on their own or through public pressure, that compulsory use of tech-solutions that aren't up to the task is a bad idea. It's also extremely positive to see that some groups advocating for stronger copyright protections seem to have begun to agree that Article 13 in particular takes it too far. Obviously there's a difference between wanting to have some measure to stop perceived copyright violations (obviously there's still a highly contentious debate on how far copyrights should even go in the digital age) and literally forcing any site that makes a living hosting user-generated content to go out of business.

Article 11 and Article 13 have been like an out-of-control train rushing toward its final destination - this development looks to me to be the first significant bit of sabotage on its tracks. Of course this doesn't mean that we've won yet, but it proves that it's still too early to leave the trenches.

[Sain]

Seems like things are turning out to the better for article 13. All references to pre-upload filters were removed, and the text itself has been made to sound a lot more sensible. Probably not perfect, but pretty good.

Here's the new version for those interested.

There seems to be a lot of panic flavoured discussion going about it online though, and some of it blatant lies that contradict the text of the newest revision (especially on reddit...)

[Strident]

A major issue with the EU is that it is quietly hoarding power, while being quite careful to not "tread on the toes" of people's ordinary lives too much...yet.

The copyright directives are warning for the future.

They will water them down somewhat in order to avoid too much uproar, but the underlying intention and direction of travel is clear: greater regulatory control over Internet content.

They will come back for more control at a later date, and take a smaller bite for now.

The EU works hand in glove with the big corporates - and this is what it's basically about, making sure only the bug corporates can influence the Internet and to stifle independent content.

The problem is there is virtually no way of ordinary citizens overcoming this.
First, your MEP is not directly accountable to you. They are elected by list not by name. This means you can't threaten to not vote for them next time around.
To be re-elected as an MEP it's far more important to be near the top of your party nomination list than it is to do the bidding of the voters. So there is a strong incentive to do your party's bidding.

Moreover, MEP influence over EU legislation is very limited. They pass or reject it, but they don't write it. And if it is rejected, legislation can just be brought back again and again till it passes.

Most of the time, this doesn't matter much, but it's a terrible system, and one day, when it treads on your toes, it will be scary how little you, as the electorate can do about it.

Notice in the Brexit negotiations, the EU negotiatiors are relaxed. Part of this because they can send the EU to hell in a handcart and keep their jobs. So they don't fear no deal Brexit. If no deal Brexit happens and causes havoc in France, it won't affect their job security.

Conversely on the UK side, the government are constantly hampered by fear of how they will be perceived by the electorate.

Now, on that particular example, it seems to be an argument against democracy! But I think it's a demonstration of how different the EU mentality is.

[Tamhansen]

A major issue with the EU is that it is quietly hoarding power, while being quite careful to not "tread on the toes" of people's ordinary lives too much...yet.

The copyright directives are warning for the future.

They will water them down somewhat in order to avoid too much uproar, but the underlying intention and direction of travel is clear: greater regulatory control over Internet content.

They will come back for more control at a later date, and take a smaller bite for now.

The EU works hand in glove with the big corporates - and this is what it's basically about, making sure only the bug corporates can influence the Internet and to stifle independent content.

The problem is there is virtually no way of ordinary citizens overcoming this.
First, your MEP is not directly accountable to you. They are elected by list not by name. This means you can't threaten to not vote for them next time around.
To be re-elected as an MEP it's far more important to be near the top of your party nomination list than it is to do the bidding of the voters. So there is a strong incentive to do your party's bidding.

Moreover, MEP influence over EU legislation is very limited. They pass or reject it, but they don't write it. And if it is rejected, legislation can just be brought back again and again till it passes.

Most of the time, this doesn't matter much, but it's a terrible system, and one day, when it treads on your toes, it will be scary how little you, as the electorate can do about it.

Notice in the Brexit negotiations, the EU negotiatiors are relaxed. Part of this because they can send the EU to hell in a handcart and keep their jobs. So they don't fear no deal Brexit. If no deal Brexit happens and causes havoc in France, it won't affect their job security.

Conversely on the UK side, the government are constantly hampered by fear of how they will be perceived by the electorate.

Now, on that particular example, it seems to be an argument against democracy! But I think it's a demonstration of how different the EU mentality is.

Nice one sided view of things really. Lets straighten a few things out.

EU parliamentarians are chosen by list, however this makes them no less acountable. The party will still need to win those seats, so they'll still need those votes. And be fair if you have a system like the UK, there are constituencies there where a certain party could run a fishstick as their candidate and still win. Those are called safe seats, usually Tory or Labour.

Secondly, the negotiators on the EU side aren't relaxed because of job security, their relaxed because they had a clear mandate, a clear goal and boundaries. The British side however had no mandate, a goal that shifted every five minutes, leadership that changed about as much, and no idea what they were supposed to get out of the deal.

The problem with the UK negotiators, as is evidenced by the recent votes is lack of direction and lack of leadership.

Having served in public office I can tell you. List based candidates are just as much worried about the voting public as those standing in constituencies, because if you screw up, your party suffers, and forget getting anywhere near the top if that happens.

The main reason EU parliament members are relatively safe, is because nobody really cares.

Now I could hold a speech on why list candidates and proportional representation make for a more democratic, more accountable and fairer system, but that's for another thread in the future perhaps.

Back on topic. The issue with the EU isn't the EP, or how it is elected. It is the council. Made up of 28 (soon 27) heads of state who get the final say on any piece of legislation. That, combined with fierce protectiveness of national interests and veto rights makes getting sane legislation out a herculean task.

Now if you worry about the EU falling prey to big business, I'd be more concerned for the UK outside the EU, seeing as there's already fargoing plans to sell of the health services, major utility companies are in the hands of foreign state owned companies, and more are on the way, and the UK government has already alluded to dropping food safety standards to acquire trade deals with the US and India (Both known for having some of the most terrible food safety standards in the world.)

Its always fun when people try to scare folks by talking of the EU and its ceaseless powergrab on behalf of big business, while in fact it has been the EU that has done more to protect the consumer and the employee against corporate interests than any national government ever had.

Enjoying your 22+ vacation days? Thank the EU
Paid maternity leave? Thank the EU
Forced resting times between shifts? Thank the EU
No poisonous HFCS in your drinks? Thank the EU
No Chlorinated chicken? Thank the EU
Able to get compensated for a delayed flight? Thank the EU
No roaming charges? Thank the EU
Able to get refund on your steam game for 14 days? Thank the EU
Opt outs on cookies? Thank the EU

The list goes on and on.

Is the EU perfect? Heck no. Especially the position of the council, and ridiculous veto powers are a problem.
Is the power of lobbying groups too big? Yeah, way too big, but that goes for the national governments as well. Look at Washington, or closer by, Westminster. The EU commisioner for health isn't a major shareholder of a private health firm looking to privatise health. Can we say the same for mr Cu.. ehm Hunt?

Is this copyright directive a step in the wrong direction? Yeah, it is. But people make mistakes, and already the new directive is become a topic for revision and watering down, so I'm less worried about that, than I am about Virgin healthcare owning the 7 highest valued health service contracts despite being underbid by the good old NHS, or the fracking close to residential areas.

TL:DR This "EU is Big business out to get you" mantra is nonsense, and needs to be stopped. The EU isn't perfect, but it does more for consumers and employees than most national governments.

[Lustful Bride]

So it got passed today. Will it have any effect on E?

[gaggedLouise]

So it got passed today. Will it have any effect on E?

Not much, since E is an American site and the servers are under U.S. law. There's no risk of E getting blocked for us European users, either.

And in any case, it's very unclear how far-reaching the effects would be for Europe. The deliberations still have some way to go before there is any final legal text, and even then it will ultimately be up to each member state just how they want to encode this into their legislation. Not much is likely to happen legally within the next two years or so.

It's not at all clear how sites like Youtube, Instagram or Facebook are going to respond, or how long they would be forced to go. At worst, Youtube could (in theory) be forced to remove every video that's not either 1) uploaded by the copyright holders or 2) made from start to finish by a private person with no use (or adaptation) of anything that's under copyright.  This would essentially reduce the site to a firmly regulated showroom for movie and game trailers, copyright-bound music videos uploaded by the legit folks - plus a hundred million mostly amateur video clips of people's barbecue parties, karaoke singing and kids attempting to dance. Next to no professional content apart from what record and movie companies allow to be uploaded on their own terms. Such a site would lose 90% of its audience, most people would spend a lot less time there,and Google would no doubt hate it.  :-X A site like Pinterest would simply collapse. But I think it's unlikely things would go quite that far.

[Vekseid]

No.

Let's assume this idiocy actually starts making it into national laws, as these articles require:

1) I am not subject to any EU jurisdiction. No matter what, the only thing they could do would be to block E. They cannot shut E down. Even so, I don't actually qualify for 'targeting an EU audience' - I don't offer services in German.

2) If the 'link tax' starts getting passed by various EU nations, and for some reason I cared to comply, my response will be to either remove all links to EU websites, or obfuscate and gate said links, depending. I would be tempted to provide an API to make it easier for other social websites to do this. I probably won't be alone. "It doesn't apply to single word links" - yeah but I'm not going to try to create a parser to pick out fucking Germanic compound words. Their intent is this won't be voluntary - you are an EU press platform, the idea is your government will require you to charge. Paradox posts a dev diary for one of their games? How can I tell that apart from being press?

3) I'm just going to ignore Article 13 and whatever laws it spews. I think most of the Internet will. They can only shut down EU sites with this. Or close down EU hosts. Or force EU registrars to act. They can make ISPs have blacklists, but that will get ugly fast. False positives, false negatives, and suddenly American VPNs are all the rage for some reason.

4) The thing is though, sites south of the top thousand - and E is never going to get that high - aren't on the radar for what the EU wants to punish. I don't think we'll even see a blacklist.



In short, I don't think this will affect anyone. Maybe more targeted court cases at Google, Twitter (if they host in the EU), Facebook, etc.

I don't expect this law to remain in force for very long, if it even passes the final step to force countries to start writing laws. Who will be facing their own lobbies.

[Galactic Druid]

So it got passed today. Will it have any effect on E?

No.

Let's assume this idiocy actually starts making it into national laws, as these articles require:

1) I am not subject to any EU jurisdiction. No matter what, the only thing they could do would be to block E. They cannot shut E down. Even so, I don't actually qualify for 'targeting an EU audience' - I don't offer services in German.

2) If the 'link tax' starts getting passed by various EU nations, and for some reason I cared to comply, my response will be to either remove all links to EU websites, or obfuscate and gate said links, depending. I would be tempted to provide an API to make it easier for other social websites to do this. I probably won't be alone. "It doesn't apply to single word links" - yeah but I'm not going to try to create a parser to pick out fucking Germanic compound words. Their intent is this won't be voluntary - you are an EU press platform, the idea is your government will require you to charge. Paradox posts a dev diary for one of their games? How can I tell that apart from being press?

3) I'm just going to ignore Article 13 and whatever laws it spews. I think most of the Internet will. They can only shut down EU sites with this. Or close down EU hosts. Or force EU registrars to act. They can make ISPs have blacklists, but that will get ugly fast. False positives, false negatives, and suddenly American VPNs are all the rage for some reason.

4) The thing is though, sites south of the top thousand - and E is never going to get that high - aren't on the radar for what the EU wants to punish. I don't think we'll even see a blacklist.



In short, I don't think this will affect anyone. Maybe more targeted court cases at Google, Twitter (if they host in the EU), Facebook, etc.

I don't expect this law to remain in force for very long, if it even passes the final step to force countries to start writing laws. Who will be facing their own lobbies.

I came here to ask this exact same question, but it looks like I already have my answer. I only learned about Article 13 recently from reddit, where some users were calling it the 'death of the internet' and fandoms, etc. I will admit, from what I gathered, I did kind of wonder about if it would impact E, since plenty of writers use face claims from models or artists, or write fandom based stories.

It's nice to know that's not the case, and reading this thread has given me a much better idea of what the laws passed could actually do.

I'm still not actually sure why this is being touted as the 'meme ban', though. Even memes that use copywrited character images like Spongebob hardly seem to be what people are going to go after. If I'm reading everything right, it looks like the people who have should be most concerned are streamers/let's play makers.