EU copyright Directive article 13

[SidheLady]

I saw a video about this today, and while I have been looking for more information, this seems significant and people should know

https://saveyourinternet.eu/

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180525/10072939912/forget-gdpr-eus-new-copyright-proposal-will-be-complete-utter-disaster-internet.shtml

[Lustful Bride]

Can anyone from the EU confirm or tell us if this is as bad as it sounds?

[SidheLady]

It's being kept very, very, very quiet.

Theres been nothing on the news, it's even hard to find info online

[Vekseid]

"You should move your hosting to Europe, Veks!"

Exhibit thirteen. Thousand.

[SidheLady]

I say this, while it's in europe (now), as it seems to being pushed by corperate interests, if the damned thing passes, it's not gonna be long before it tries to make the leap across the pond.

[midnightblack]

Can anyone from the EU confirm or tell us if this is as bad as it sounds?

I've literally never heard of this before and if it wasn't for those links I would have been half-tempted to write it off as fake news, given that we're bombarded in every breathing moment with "inside info" on how the evil overlords from Brussels plan to enslave the world (courtesy of our friends in East >.> ). But admitting that it is accurate, I'm still not overly stressed about it. I don't see such attempts to regulate the Internet being applicable for the time being, try as they might.

[Vekseid]

I say this, while it's in europe (now), as it seems to being pushed by corperate interests, if the damned thing passes, it's not gonna be long before it tries to make the leap across the pond.

No media organization in the US is dumb enough to lobby for link taxes. "What do you mean Google, Facebook, Reddit, Youtube, and Twitter removed all of our links from their sites!?"

Even Rupert Murdoch backed down on this.

Mandatory filtering would need to be passed in a manner similar to the original CDA attempt. Which got knocked out 9-0. Meanwhile there are a lot more organizations, people, and businesses in the US with the desire to stop it.

I imagine the actual effect of this law will be to drive more western aggregators and social media to the US, and to force those companies to cater to English and American dialects over EU languages.

[Sain]

Snipped this from the Explain It Like I'm 5 subreddit. This should explain the new directive somewhat.

First off, linking what on earth you're talking about might help, searching on Google ment I had to wade through a 1000 think pieces before finding anything offical.

Second, from what I can tell, it removes the limited protection Hosting sites had for hosting copyrighted material.

So before if I was a hosting service, like squarespace, I would be somewhat protected if someone used my equipment to share copyrighted material. As long as I can prove that I had nothing to do with the site that did share it and I did not know such content was on my hardware I'm in the clear.

Under article 13, my hosting service no longer has that protection. Meaning a rightholder (the person who owns the copyright in question) can sue me even if I didn't know the content is on my hardware and was being shared. It effectively means a rightholder can police what is and isn't a copyright violation and allow them to get hosting platforms to remove content, rather than dealing with a potentially anonymous person. Think of YouTube DMCA takedowns but with more teeth and on every European server.

Which is kinda iffy depending on the rightholder and how willing they are to yell "copyright violation!" For instance, movie reviews are typically not a case of copyright violation, even if they use footage or screenshots, as the reviewer would likely need some copyrighted material to make the review, but won't likely be a replacement for the copyrighted material. As in a review of The Avengers: Infinity War is in no way a replacement for watching the movie itself.

So the fear is, if a movie studio (or any other company) wanted to censor negative press they could just claim a copyright infringement on 2 seconds of footage or a screenshot and have that negative press go away. In theory it seems like it's possible in the text of the law, but it has yet to be proven in court. And a law that isn't enforced is not a law. Well that and attempting to remove critism from the public eye tends to create an even bigger problem.

[SidheLady]

I saw this video a few days ago. It seems to have co-elated most of the relevant data and some of the news stories

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwR34cT1grw

[Lustful Bride]

I saw this video a few days ago. It seems to have co-elated most of the relevant data and some of the news stories

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwR34cT1grw

Ive seen his video in multiple places, but many are saying he is some Alt Right guy and that the bill might be misreported.

I don't understand the legal speech but this is a snapshot from the bill itself.

[gaggedLouise]

Never heard of it before, but I found this article from the Financial Times; it's clearly about the same "reform package" and two years old, so it must have stalled once before within the EU's political machinery.

https://www.ft.com/content/7dec4252-7a85-11e6-ae24-f193b105145e

I think this piece from Politico covers some of the run-up to the defeat of an earlier similar proposal, where Google and Facebook were to be heavily fined for relaying news stories from the "old news media": https://www.politico.eu/article/plan-to-make-google-pay-for-news-hits-rocks-copyright-reform-european-commission/

Europe’s press barons thought they’d scored a major victory last fall when the European Commission threw its weight behind their idea to create a special protection for digital journalism, the linchpin of their strategy for long-term survival. But now the plan threatens to come undone.

Advocates of the reform say it would force the globe-spanning fat cats of the internet — platforms like Google, Facebook and LinkedIn, which use outside news content to attract eyeballs without paying a single cent — to compensate Europe’s publishers for use of their content. Much as radio stations pay fees to music publishers to play their songs, the companies would compensate news outlets for carrying their content.

If the reform goes through, the victory would reverberate around the world, with publishers in other regions likely to demand similar treatment. Less than six months after the Commission unveiled its proposal, however, the prospects for a so-called publisher’s right are murkier than ever amid growing doubts the plan can win enough support in the European Parliament.

The Commission (the "EU government") is evidently pushing for the package again after it stalled in 2016/17, but it doesn't look like a parliament vote is imminent. This page tracks the progress of the "directive" (EU bill, sort of) but alos hints that the Commission may be sitting it out to try to bring the proposal to the parliament after the next EUP elections next year, when the parliament might have become more amenable to such a "reform". https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f8f28466-b597-470b-a02f-6ca91a41907e

[SidheLady]

Ive seen his video in multiple places, but many are saying he is some Alt Right guy and that the bill might be misreported.

I don't understand the legal speech but this is a snapshot from the bill itself.

Honestly, if your worried about his political leanings, take a look at his sources. Use -those- as a basis. But the problem is, this isn't being talked about. Spain has just implemented something like this law, and google news in spain has closed.

[gaggedLouise]

Honestly, if your worried about his political leanings, take a look at his sources. Use -those- as a basis. But the problem is, this isn't being talked about. Spain has just implemented something like this law, and google news in spain has closed.

If they try to implement it across the EU there will certainly be appeals to try to block these sweeping new rules - both in national courts and in the EU high court at Strasbourg.

Also, moving this kind of EU directive into actual written law is essentially the business of national governments and they may not be very keen on laying the field open for this kind of chase for copyrighted material. We'll see.

[Mera1506]

Can anyone from the EU confirm or tell us if this is as bad as it sounds?

Yup, if this passes byebye fair use and hello censorship galore and link taxes on every link you want to post...

[gaggedLouise]

Yup, if this passes byebye fair use and hello censorship galore and link taxes on every link you want to post...

Seems there was a vote in the EU Parliament's Judicial Committee on this yesterday - this paragraph, not the entire bill - and it passed, though with lots of last-minute changes, compromise wordings and rewrites, making it a really complicated vote. The whole directive (bill) is set for a vote in the EUP sometime this autumn, unless the Commission decides to move it till after the 2019 elections. Either way, it's very uncertain how the vote in the parliament would turn out.

The idea doesn't seem to be to simply scrap all "unofficial" upload copies of video clips and the like, rather that sites like facebook and Youtube would need to pay a license to be free to host such stuff. Since many people who are showing this kind of thing on their blogs, or on sites like E, are simply hotlinking to Youtube, this wouldn't mean that you can't use a copyrighted YT video online anymore, but it's not a good law to propose anyway, of course. We'll see.

[Shiva]

The undisclosed purpose of this law is to combat 'right-wing' sites, 'alternative' news outlets, 'populism', and 'hate speech' comments and memes. They're not going to regulate everything, only that which doesn't align with EU left-wing ideology. It's quite obvious as someone who lives in the EU. They are so afraid of the 'Nazi' boogeyman.

[gaggedLouise]

The undisclosed purpose of this law is to combat 'right-wing' sites, 'alternative' news outlets, 'populism', and 'hate speech' comments and memes. They're not going to regulate everything, only that which doesn't align with EU left-wing ideology. It's quite obvious as someone who lives in the EU. They are so afraid of the 'Nazi' boogeyman.

I'm guessing that Youtube might lose most of its thousands of "Hitler rages when he hears of X"  spoof videos though :) (the original source being a German film, Der Untergang)

[SidheLady]

The undisclosed purpose of this law is to combat 'right-wing' sites, 'alternative' news outlets, 'populism', and 'hate speech' comments and memes. They're not going to regulate everything, only that which doesn't align with EU left-wing ideology. It's quite obvious as someone who lives in the EU. They are so afraid of the 'Nazi' boogeyman.

No, not regulate everything, just everything they dont like, that isn't illegal...

[TheGlyphstone]

Is this quite obvious in the same sense that it's quite obvious to some people here in the states that the government is putting mind-altering chemicals into the drinking water supply to infect undesirable groups with homosexuality?

[Quick Ben]

The undisclosed purpose of this law is to combat 'right-wing' sites, 'alternative' news outlets, 'populism', and 'hate speech' comments and memes. They're not going to regulate everything, only that which doesn't align with EU left-wing ideology. It's quite obvious as someone who lives in the EU. They are so afraid of the 'Nazi' boogeyman.

No, not regulate everything, just everything they dont like, that isn't illegal...

+ Over 9000 to the both of you.

[Shiva]

Is this quite obvious in the same sense that it's quite obvious to some people here in the states that the government is putting mind-altering chemicals into the drinking water supply to infect undesirable groups with homosexuality?

No. It's not in that ballpark. That there is a conspiracy theory. We're talking about blatant censorship of certain ideologies deemed 'wrong' by the EU.

[Scribbles]

Is there anything that can be done to have an impact on this proposed bill, somewhere to email or call, beyond simply knowing about it?

Is this quite obvious in the same sense that it's quite obvious to some people here in the states that the government is putting mind-altering chemicals into the drinking water supply to infect undesirable groups with homosexuality?

Haha, that's crazy! Homosexuality is gradually becoming more accepted, so now the chemical turns you into a telemarketer...

[TheGlyphstone]

No. It's not in that ballpark. That there is a conspiracy theory. We're talking about blatant censorship of certain ideologies deemed 'wrong' by the EU.

Acceptable, and I apologize for being derisive. But while I have no trouble believing the EU will suppress ideologies inimical to its interests, it's the belief that Directive 13 is a secretly malicious backdoor attempt at said suppression via ( presumably) only enforcing copyright claims or link taxes on 'undesirable' websites that sets off my conspiracy theory alarms.

[Shiva]

Acceptable, and I apologize for being derisive. But while I have no trouble believing the EU will suppress ideologies inimical to its interests, it's the belief that Directive 13 is a secretly malicious backdoor attempt at said suppression via ( presumably) only enforcing copyright claims or link taxes on 'undesirable' websites that sets off my conspiracy theory alarms.

This is how I and others perceive it in European countries: For a very long time, the EU and local politicians (especially in my country) have talked about the 'rise of populism' and 'alternative media', and how it is damaging to democracy. It's all very ironic considering populism is 'rule of the people', which should be embraced by a democracy. This censorship bill is the culmination of this discussion and search for a solution to the 'problem' of populism and alternative media. The fact that they despise the voice of the people and media that isn't filtered for political correctness leads people to believe that Article 13 has malicious intent with the disguise of copyright laws.

We are all very tired of this at this point. Us Europeans have lost all faith in this Orwellian over-state.

[TheGlyphstone]

This is how I and others perceive it in European countries: For a very long time, the EU and local politicians (especially in my country) have talked about the 'rise of populism' and 'alternative media', and how it is damaging to democracy. It's all very ironic considering populism is 'rule of the people', which should be embraced by a democracy. This censorship bill is the culmination of this discussion and search for a solution to the 'problem' of populism and alternative media. The fact that they despise the voice of the people and media that isn't filtered for political correctness leads people to believe that Article 13 has malicious intent with the disguise of copyright laws.

We are all very tired of this at this point. Us Europeans have lost all faith in this Orwellian over-state.

Okay, I can see that. It's the local context of political statements we don't see over here that give the credibility to your worries I didn't see.

The EU always did seem like a sort of ramshackle entity, trying to find a nebulous compromise between independent sovereignties and unification. Not trying go full MURICA, but it reminds me of the Articles of Confederation that the American colonies originally wrote. Ambitious, but riddled with so many undermining clauses as to lose any real scope of effectiveness - and at least the Continental Congress was still elected. From what others have said here, it sounds like the EU Parliament only serves to rubber-stamp decisions made by the un-elected bureaucratic wing.

[midnightblack]

We are all very tired of this at this point. Us Europeans have lost all faith in this Orwellian over-state.

Uh, perhaps "Orwellian over-state" may be pushing it a bit?  ::)

Europe's an eclectic but pretty chill place all in all, and that's coming from someone living in one of its more backwater countries.

[Quick Ben]

Okay, I can see that. It's the local context of political statements we don't see over here that give the credibility to your worries I didn't see.

The EU always did seem like a sort of ramshackle entity, trying to find a nebulous compromise between independent sovereignties and unification. Not trying go full MURICA, but it reminds me of the Articles of Confederation that the American colonies originally wrote. Ambitious, but riddled with so many undermining clauses as to lose any real scope of effectiveness - and at least the Continental Congress was still elected. From what others have said here, it sounds like the EU Parliament only serves to rubber-stamp decisions made by the un-elected bureaucratic wing.

Bingo.

The EU may have been a benevolent idea at the beginning. I preface that with a 'may' because I'm deeply suspicious of any governing body that can stick its hands into another country's business, especially when that body was not elected by that country's people. Their pressure to push EU-members into taking a seemingly indefinite number of refugees has created a massive divide that we see today in the EU. The refugee crisis is a major reason why the people of the UK voted to leave. It's a major reason why Hungary has fought back against the EU, as has Poland, and now it seems Italy is joining that front.

I suspect we may soon see Italy exit the EU, Poland exit the EU, and Hungary exit the EU.

Admittedly, I have qualms with the EU so take me as a biased source: but who isn't biased? I'd rather see the EU as a governing body die, frankly. Let country's be country's ruled by the elected leaders of their citizens. That's as it should be.

[Shiva]

Uh, perhaps "Orwellian over-state" may be pushing it a bit?  ::)

No. It's a body of politicians that nobody has elected, and they make major decisions with immense societal impact for us without any kind of vote or consideration of the citizens in question. It is an Orwellian over-state by definition.

[TheGlyphstone]

I tend to use 'Orwellian' as an adjective more in line with the book itself - as quoted a summary:

' an attitude and a brutal policy of draconian control by propaganda, surveillance, misinformation, denial of truth (doublethink), and manipulation of the past". Un-elected officials making sweeping policy decisions is Autocratic, but without the above traits is not in itself Orwellian.

[Shiva]

I tend to use 'Orwellian' as an adjective more in line with the book itself - as quoted a summary:

' an attitude and a brutal policy of draconian control by propaganda, surveillance, misinformation, denial of truth (doublethink), and manipulation of the past". Un-elected officials making sweeping policy decisions is Autocratic, but without the above traits is not in itself Orwellian.

Well, you don't live here, so I can be difficult to understand. It's much more than just this incident. All of those things that you listed are present in a realistic sense as opposed to fictional.

[midnightblack]

No. It's a body of politicians that nobody has elected, and they make major decisions with immense societal impact for us without any kind of vote or consideration of the citizens in question. It is an Orwellian over-state by definition.

Actually, the politicians are either selected from the European Parliament (that is, from representatives voted by the people of Europe), or picked from member countries based on approval from their national leaders (which again, are voted by the people of the said country). "Orwellian" refers to an extreme limit of totalitarianism and was largely inspired by Stalinism.   

Of course that life in the EU isn't perfect and not at the same standard throughout the member states, but I'm pretty certain that it's largely better than in most other places on Earth. I've traveled here and there, so I got to have a taste of a few different flavors regarding the quality of life. Today I live in the butt-end of civilized Europe, and still the only thing I can really complain about is the Internet speed lol. 

[Shiva]

Actually, the politicians are either selected from the European Parliament (that is, from representatives voted by the people of Europe), or picked from member countries based on approval from their national leaders (which again, are voted by the people of the said country). "Orwellian" refers to an extreme limit of totalitarianism and was largely inspired by Stalinism.   

Of course that life in the EU isn't perfect and not at the same standard throughout the member states, but I'm pretty certain that it's largely better than in most other places on Earth. I've traveled here and there, so I got to have a taste of a few different flavors regarding the quality of life. Today I live in the butt-end of civilized Europe, and still the only thing I can really complain about is the Internet speed lol. 

I haven't been anywhere to vote on a major issue in my entire life, other than which party that gets to rule without consequence in parliament. I don't consider this to be a democracy. We are constantly bombarded with propaganda in media about right-wing 'extremism', 'populism', and 'racism'. People are fined or go to jail for being criticizing immigration policies online, next to losing their jobs and friends. And we are constantly told that our native people don't exist, and that we have no culture, that we should just disappear, that our 'future' is in immigrants.

I understand that this forum is a left-wing echo chamber, which is fine, but please don't undermine the severity of this situation. It's very insulting.

[Lustful Bride]

I haven't been anywhere to vote on a major issue in my entire life, other than which party that gets to rule without consequence in parliament. I don't consider this to be a democracy. We are constantly bombarded with propaganda in media about right-wing 'extremism', 'populism', and 'racism'. People are fined or go to jail for being criticizing immigration policies online, next to losing their jobs and friends. And we are constantly told that our native people don't exist, and that we have no culture, that we should just disappear, that our 'future' is in immigrants.

I understand that this forum is a left-wing echo chamber, which is fine, but please don't undermine the severity of this situation. It's very insulting.

You kind of went to an extreme there. While I will agree that we always here more about the things the far right does (usually because the extreme right uses violence more often) I don't think it is to the extreme you feel it is. I have heard the tired meme of 'The West has no culture' a lot, but I think half of it (Like many insulting things on the internet) is really done just to get a rise out of people.

Then again I'm not European, and I don't know enough to really say one way or the other.

[Sain]

I haven't been anywhere to vote on a major issue in my entire life, other than which party that gets to rule without consequence in parliament. I don't consider this to be a democracy. We are constantly bombarded with propaganda in media about right-wing 'extremism', 'populism', and 'racism'. People are fined or go to jail for being criticizing immigration policies online, next to losing their jobs and friends. And we are constantly told that our native people don't exist, and that we have no culture, that we should just disappear, that our 'future' is in immigrants.

I understand that this forum is a left-wing echo chamber, which is fine, but please don't undermine the severity of this situation. It's very insulting.

That probably varies country-to-country in EU. Here in Finland nobody except the most lunatic left wingers are claiming we don't have a culture. Of course we didn't get as many immigrants % wise as some of the other countries so what we got seems to be more and more something that we can handle.

In regards to EU parlament and this recent law though. Yeah... It's ridiculous how few actually vote MEPs based on their opinions. It's also nigh impossible to know what is going on in EU level decision making for the average citizen since it's rarely in the news in any significant way. I just hope that they define the articles 11 and 13 more until they make the final directive.

[midnightblack]

I haven't been anywhere to vote on a major issue in my entire life, other than which party that gets to rule without consequence in parliament. I don't consider this to be a democracy. We are constantly bombarded with propaganda in media about right-wing 'extremism', 'populism', and 'racism'. People are fined or go to jail for being criticizing immigration policies online, next to losing their jobs and friends. And we are constantly told that our native people don't exist, and that we have no culture, that we should just disappear, that our 'future' is in immigrants.

I understand that this forum is a left-wing echo chamber, which is fine, but please don't undermine the severity of this situation. It's very insulting.

I was merely suggesting that calling the EU an "Orwellian over-state" may be a slight over-statement. Especially given that the quality of life of the European citizens has been steadily increasing over the last decades. I recall what a disaster my country was back in the 90s, when I was a toddler. For all of its present-day flaws, it's still leaps and bounds away from where it was 20-30 years ago. And that is objectively true throughout pretty much all of Europe. While I have no intention to be insulting (and I can only apologize if I come off as that), I will admit that I somewhat fail to see "the severity of the situation".

Regarding your other statement, I'd like to point out that parties don't get to rule without consequence. Precisely because you live in a democracy, it is your duty as a free citizen to keep a watchful eye and call them out if they intend to do stupid things. I would know, as over here we've been battling morons in charge for close to 2 years now and managed to stop a lot of their crap by calling it out and taking to the streets. Of course that ideally you should never be in the situation to have to do this, but in an "Orwellian" society we would have all been reduced to the dust of our bones instead of getting our point across.

I don't get much media bombardment, probably because I tend to do a pretty good job at shielding myself from it. I don't find its influence particularly healthy. It's really just a personal opinion, but I think most stuff on the Internet regarding the things that you mentioned should be taken with care and a grain of salt, as reality is generally a bit more complex and nuanced than the way it is portrayed in order to fit a given agenda.

[SidheLady]

Okay, just an update, it's passed the first stage. It will be voted on again at the end of the year, or early next year

[Skynet]

I haven't been anywhere to vote on a major issue in my entire life, other than which party that gets to rule without consequence in parliament. I don't consider this to be a democracy. We are constantly bombarded with propaganda in media about right-wing 'extremism', 'populism', and 'racism'. People are fined or go to jail for being criticizing immigration policies online, next to losing their jobs and friends. And we are constantly told that our native people don't exist, and that we have no culture, that we should just disappear, that our 'future' is in immigrants.

I understand that this forum is a left-wing echo chamber, which is fine, but please don't undermine the severity of this situation. It's very insulting.

Source on the bold?

[Sara Nilsson]

That probably varies country-to-country in EU. Here in Finland nobody except the most lunatic left wingers are claiming we don't have a culture. Of course we didn't get as many immigrants % wise as some of the other countries so what we got seems to be more and more something that we can handle.

Yeah I never heard of anything like that in Sweden either. And I have never heard anyone claim that the sami don't exist. With it being midsummer now you just need to look out and see lots and lots of Swedish culture (or rather I would have if I hadn't been stuck in this hell hole of a country ^^)

[Shiva]

I was merely suggesting that calling the EU an "Orwellian over-state" may be a slight over-statement. Especially given that the quality of life of the European citizens has been steadily increasing over the last decades. I recall what a disaster my country was back in the 90s, when I was a toddler. For all of its present-day flaws, it's still leaps and bounds away from where it was 20-30 years ago. And that is objectively true throughout pretty much all of Europe. While I have no intention to be insulting (and I can only apologize if I come off as that), I will admit that I somewhat fail to see "the severity of the situation".

Regarding your other statement, I'd like to point out that parties don't get to rule without consequence. Precisely because you live in a democracy, it is your duty as a free citizen to keep a watchful eye and call them out if they intend to do stupid things. I would know, as over here we've been battling morons in charge for close to 2 years now and managed to stop a lot of their crap by calling it out and taking to the streets. Of course that ideally you should never be in the situation to have to do this, but in an "Orwellian" society we would have all been reduced to the dust of our bones instead of getting our point across.

I don't get much media bombardment, probably because I tend to do a pretty good job at shielding myself from it. I don't find its influence particularly healthy. It's really just a personal opinion, but I think most stuff on the Internet regarding the things that you mentioned should be taken with care and a grain of salt, as reality is generally a bit more complex and nuanced than the way it is portrayed in order to fit a given agenda.

We have different perceptions of things, then, and that's fine. The things I mention are based on what I've observed in my daily life, around the people I know and talk to. It has nothing to do with conspiracies on the internet.

Source on the bold?

That would out where I live. I have no interest in doing that.

[Skynet]

That would out where I live. I have no interest in doing that.

And other people in this thread said that this is not happening in the Europe they also share beyond some fringe groups with little if any power. If I may ask in case the situation is wildly different where you are, what is the country you currently reside in?

[Sain]

And other people in this thread said that this is not happening in the Europe they also share beyond some fringe groups with little if any power. If I may ask in case the situation is wildly different where you are, what is the country you currently reside in?

To be fair some of us mentioned our experience in two countries. No idea what's going on in the others. EU is rather heterogeneous compared to US so I would not use two anecdotes as any sort of evidence to make generalizations on. Experiences may vary.

[Oniya]

And other people in this thread said that this is not happening in the Europe they also share beyond some fringe groups with little if any power. If I may ask in case the situation is wildly different where you are, what is the country you currently reside in?

Shiva has said that they don't want to reveal their location.  While that means that there's no way of confirming their statement, that request should be respected.

[Skynet]

To be fair some of us mentioned our experience in two countries. No idea what's going on in the others. EU is rather heterogeneous compared to US so I would not use two anecdotes as any sort of evidence to make generalizations on. Experiences may vary.

Shiva has said that they don't want to reveal their location.  While that means that there's no way of confirming their statement, that request should be respected.

I didn't know if Shiva was talking about Europe as a whole or a more localized phenomenon of leftist caricatures gaining mainstream legitimacy. But I did not know she wished for her nationality to be confidential, so I apologize for asking.

[SidheLady]

I didn't know if Shiva was talking about Europe as a whole or a more localized phenomenon of leftist caricatures gaining mainstream legitimacy. But I did not know she wished for her nationality to be confidential, so I apologize for asking.

I know in the UK, much like in the US, there does seem to be a subtle bias in the media and reporting, what is reported and how. I suspect, this is what Shiva is referring to. However, when it comes to the EU, there are huge pieces of the actual political machinery that has no accountability.

[Shiva]

I didn't know if Shiva was talking about Europe as a whole or a more localized phenomenon of leftist caricatures gaining mainstream legitimacy. But I did not know she wished for her nationality to be confidential, so I apologize for asking.

I guess it's not a big deal, really. For the sake of argument here, I've searched for an example. This video is from an official, political gathering where even the King was present. This woman is some kind of respected historian.

'There is no native Swedish culture': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eajx2iUWlFQ. At 1:40 in the video, she says "The idea that there would be a uniform, native culture with roots in ancient history is not based on facts." She is talking about Swedish culture.

Of course, I can't search for every instance where similar statements are made. It happens in various interviews, TV shows, news articles, etc., that might originally be about something else such as immigration.

[midnightblack]

However, when it comes to the EU, there are huge pieces of the actual political machinery that has no accountability.

No, not really. You make it sound like there's someone enforcing decisions for everyone else on no other basis aside of just because they can, and it's not like that at all. In fact, I'd say that people in charge argue way too much about what needs to be done and take way too long to actually come to a decision. If anything, that's a sign of a healthy democratic system based on debate and argument.  :P

At 1:40 in the video, she says "The idea that there would be a uniform, native culture with roots in ancient history is not based on facts." She is talking about Swedish culture.

I'm not a native Swede, but I did spend some time in that country and I have real life Swede acquaintances, so I am somewhat familiar with the way things are there. What I can say is that the view you quote is pretty specific to them in particular. I am not in a position to argue whether or not it is correct. However, I invite you to try traveling to many countries within the union, particularly eastern ones, and tell them they don't have a culture. You'll be in for a rough time.  :P There's actually a pretty strong uprising of ultra-nationalistic tendencies in some of those countries, claiming to defend precisely the culture and tradition of the people there from the many evils of globalization.

As far as I'm concerned, both sides of this loud coin are made of opportunistic dimwits that crave their moment of glory, but I think they're roughly akin to dogs barking on the side of the road while the bear keeps lumbering along.

[Vekseid]

I know in the UK, much like in the US, there does seem to be a subtle bias in the media and reporting, what is reported and how. I suspect, this is what Shiva is referring to. However, when it comes to the EU, there are huge pieces of the actual political machinery that has no accountability.

A couple years ago when a bunch of African Americans in Milwaukee had a riot ('beating up every white person!') CNN edited the audio for a bunch of footage, got caught, and got mocked.

Then they turn around and hire far-right commentators and wonder why so many people simply hate them.

It used to be a lot worse. Technology has made this easier to expose, rather than less.

No equivalent of this law in the US would be able to stop people from reporting on that sort of manipulation. There is a lot of case law protecting this in the United States, especially with regards to preventing the reporting of criticism and news in general. The only Supreme Court justice whose opinion on this is in question is Gorsuch. He's uttered some pretty idiotic opinions (Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene's Energy Group, LLC), but that would be a lot of case law and precedent for even him to toss out the window.



Meanwhile I feel Europe is slowly tying their own noose with this. You set up laws like this, and if fascists win, then what happens? This apparatus you've built gets turned against the speech you originally sought to promote.

[RedRose]

Yeah, despite SOME common laws, Europe is still extremely varied. Portugal isn't Poland isn't France isn't Denmark. Internet laws also differ.
I'm familiar with the press in various countries. It's almost always biased some way or another, especially on loaded topics, controversial ones, or because drama sells.

[Vekseid]

Split off most of the immigration discussion here:
https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=289683.msg14226958#msg14226958

Could probably have picked a better title but still.

[gaggedLouise]

The EU parliament has just returned a NO vote on this! :D

The proposed directive will now have to be rewritten, hopefully in a more cautious manner, before it is given another vote in the EUP this autumn. It should be possible to keep the more disturbing and intrusive aspects of the bill off the books indefinitely (or until the next Europarl elections next year) :)

http://www.wired.co.uk/article/article-13-eu-copyright-directive-memes

[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.