Article 13, link tax and the end of fair use

[Saru]

I just wanted to post this as it seems to have slipped under the radar recently with the introduction of GDPR.

Essentially, the EU is looking to introduce new copyright laws that, if implemented, would be disastrous for the Internet in general. The legislation is targeting 'fair use', the principle by which Internet users on forums such as this one can link to and quote from offsite news articles and other content. It also enables the sharing of images, the creation of parodies/memes and much more.

To cut to the chase, the worst aspects of what is now being referred to as "Article 13" are as follows:

Quote

Link tax: The law would require permission and potentially licensing fees to embed links in a piece of digital content, unless there’s a copyright exception. Europe does not really have a formal fair use doctrine. This essentially operates as a “link tax.”

Aggressive copyright takedown rules: Platforms would be liable for infringements by users, with some exceptions. Accordingly, content sites (e.g., music and video) would likely be compelled to proactively scan uploaded content before publishing to make sure it didn’t violate copyright rules — resulting in potential censorship.

https://searchengineland.com/eus-copyright-reform-moves-closer-to-law-299258

Unsurprisingly, the news has not been met favorably:

https://saveyourinternet.eu/

The new copyright directive will be voted on in the European parliament on June 20th/21st. Whether it will pass (especially in its current form) remains unclear, but it is very troubling that it is even being considered at all.

[+OverSword]

Sounds like possibly an effort to thwart peoples abilities to communicate political news to each other that could make things more difficult for bureaucrats.  I can't list the amount of important things I never saw on the television that I found out about on UM.  Sites like this serve a great public service partly because of that IMO.

[preacherman76]

Drudge was told this was going to happen years ago. You are exactly right OS.  This is a draconic measure to stifle communication. Sites like drudge will be completely put out of business. 

A Supreme Court judge told Drudge this was happening in America as well, back when they thought they had the presidency in the bag for 2016. 

Very troubling indeed. This needs to be stopped. 

Edited June 1, 2018 by preacherman76

[bee]

16 hours ago, Saru said:

The new copyright directive will be voted on in the European parliament on June 20th/21st. Whether it will pass (especially in its current form) remains unclear, but it is very troubling that it is even being considered at all.

 

let's hope and I mean HOPE that this kind of legislation is not allowed to ruin the Internet.... and push back the new freedoms
that people enjoy being able to talk to each other and educate each other on matters that shape societies...and the world...

it's upsetting that there are people in positions of power that would happily curtail open and honest discussion -

 

Edited June 1, 2018 by bee

[bee]

15 hours ago, OverSword said:

Sounds like possibly an effort to thwart peoples abilities to communicate political news to each other that could make things more difficult for bureaucrats.  I can't list the amount of important things I never saw on the television that I found out about on UM.  Sites like this serve a great public service partly because of that IMO.

 

re bolded...I consider that a very generous description.....  wannabe dictators would be what I would call them 

slowly but surely the handful of billionaires who own and control the MSM  are gaining ownership and control of the Internet-

and using (abusing?) their wealth and power to push forward an agenda ... (corporate, technology based, totalitarian globalism)

that's how I see it

and it's a tragedy to see the beloved internet going down the pan because of their megalomania - grrrrrrrrr

 

    

[danydandan]

I don't think this will happen, it would destory the likes of Facebook and YouTube. They won't allow it to pass. Or they will at least have a strong objection to it.

Edit: if you really think about it, it would make most website's unattainable within the EU. Does it also apply to citations? For example if you happened to post your thesis or an hypothesis online would you need to gather permissions to use them citations?

Edited June 1, 2018 by danydandan

[preacherman76]

2 hours ago, danydandan said:

I don't think this will happen, it would destory the likes of Facebook and YouTube. They won't allow it to pass. Or they will at least have a strong objection to it.

Edit: if you really think about it, it would make most website's unattainable within the EU. Does it also apply to citations? For example if you happened to post your thesis or an hypothesis online would you need to gather permissions to use them citations?

Don’t be so sure about Facebook and YouTube. They regularly censor all kinds of content at the expense of their own bottom line. 

[keithisco]

Spain and Germany have these rules in place and what resulted? Google just upped and left Spain! The EU is also trying to regulate Netflix and Amazon  Streaming services by insisting on 20% EU content, and as if that weren't bad enough (pretentious, navel gazing French films) want to force them to PAY towards this awful content... 

[+OverSword]

Can't help but suspect that blaming online activities for things such as Brexit and the US Presidential election was all meant to create enough outrage so that a percentage of human zombies will think this could be a good thing.  So I'm guessing any EU legislation is a dry run for the rest of the west.  Jay Rockefeller has been trying to push internet stifling legislation through for more than a decade in order to combat everything from terrorism to pedophilia to copyright infringement.

[AnchorSteam]

The terrifying possibility is that Tommy's case was done so clumsily on purpose, to distract from this issue.

 

 

If the USA could build a firewall to isolate it from everything web-related in Europe, I would not be so concerned with this. Maybe we should look into it anyway.

 

Basically, a "measure that will make it harder to link and quote news sources."

Big-Time news companies won't be affected, they can afford licensing that the little guys can't.  "Hey bud, you got a license for that link?"

You won't be able to use links here, or quote anyone in tow years unless you are paying special taxes. Small independent news channels will be eliminated and a copyright filter will automatically catch anyone violating these new standards. 

Google and Facebook have already spent tens of millions to put those filters in place, and we all know how they are using them; to censor Political points that they don't like. 

Will sites like this be able to survive? 

It is a very bad, poorly-written and probably unworkable law in the long run, but it could still create massive liability for anyone that the EU wishes to focus on.

 

"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
-Ayn Rand

 

I will have more on this later.... 

 

 

[CrimsonKing]

I was reading something about this the other day...but you say the EU is trying this when surely you must have mistyped and meant to say "Trump and the Russians"...no 

[AnchorSteam]

Just now, CrimsonKing said:

I was reading something about this the other day...but you say the EU is trying this when surely you must have mistyped and meant to say "Trump and the Russians"...no 

No.

Article 13 is the issue, and the EU Parliament will be voting it into effect on the 20th of June unless it is stopped, somehow.

See this too-

Yup, memes too. 

And Worldwide Mega-Corporations will probably try to comply because, as the vid says (I'll miss you, YouTube) will try to comply to avoid losing business with 500 million people and an economy nearly as large as the US. 

China is starting to look free and accessible by comparison. 

 

Is the rise of the Deep Web now inevitable? 

[CrimsonKing]

1 minute ago, AnchorSteam said:

No.

Article 13 is the issue, and the EU Parliament will be voting it into effect on the 20th of June unless it is stopped, somehow.

See this too-

Yup, memes too. 

And Worldwide Mega-Corporations will probably try to comply because, as the vid says (I'll miss you, YouTube) will try to comply to avoid losing business with 500 million people and an economy nearly as large as the US. 

China is starting to look free and accessible by comparison. 

 

Is the rise of the Deep Web now inevitable? 

Got'cha i was just bs'ing around...half of anything mentioned in the Euro section about the "GLORIOUS" EUturns into a Trump/Russia pee'ing contest... 

But seriously thanks for the updates and for any in the future 

[Setton]

Already a thread on this:

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/318461-article-13-link-tax-and-the-end-of-fair-use/

[bee]

4 hours ago, AnchorSteam said:

You won't be able to use links here, or quote anyone in tow years unless you are paying special taxes. Small independent news channels will be eliminated and a copyright filter will automatically catch anyone violating these new standards. 

Google and Facebook have already spent tens of millions to put those filters in place, and we all know how they are using them; to censor Political points that they don't like. 

Will sites like this be able to survive? 

 

Thanks for the thread - 

This should be of grave concern for anyone who enjoys using the internet and for all Alternative news sites, forums etc

This is the EU exposing itself as the aspiring totalitarian super state that it is...and I really really hope it will backfire on it
if proposals they bring in dumbs down the internet and spoils it for everyone...

The answer to this problem that faces all internet users.... which is probably the majority of people in the world - 

IS

the EU must be brought down* -

The UK voted to get out thank god... even though we haven't managed to actually leave yet due to poor negociating
and the resistance of the Remain camp...  worming it's way into trying to water down or reverse the democratic
referendum result....

So come on Italy and any other country that can help stop the slippy slope to corporate totalitarian micro management
of our lives..... call for a referendum and get out.... this kind of thing is only going to get worse as the Globalist Agenda
doubles down after Brexit and the Trump presidency showed that Populism (ie support for the concerns of ordinary people)
is flexing it's muscle....

France has recently lumbered itself with pro EU Macron ---- but they should leave asap...... and any freedom loving Germans
should start opposition to this kind of internet dictatorship now...... 

If the EU knew it would be punished for wrecking the internet as we know it.... they might be careful how they vote on this...?
 

  *and all other moves by the Globalists thwarted..... like the North American Union and the creation of a Sunni lead
Islamic State.... and other geopolitical manoeuvres that reduce the influence that the individual can have over their
own destiny and that increases the real possibility of power mad elites fking everything up... 

 

Edited June 6, 2018 by bee

[Kismit]

On 01/06/2018 at 7:37 PM, danydandan said:

I don't think this will happen, it would destory the likes of Facebook and YouTube. They won't allow it to pass. Or they will at least have a strong objection to it.

Edit: if you really think about it, it would make most website's unattainable within the EU. Does it also apply to citations? For example if you happened to post your thesis or an hypothesis online would you need to gather permissions to use them citations?

Similarly if you post something original and explicitly state it is free for public use. Perhaps a meme or two, would it be subject to the same copyrights? 

Copyrights are collected for authors or creators the EU can not legally be allowed to collect a link tax on the materials owned by somebody or distributed freely.

I believe that young techno-natives could outsmart stuffy old unwitting politicians. I would just dislike very much if something happened to UM

[+and-then]

Even sheep can get angry...

 

[AnchorSteam]

On 6/1/2018 at 12:37 AM, danydandan said:

I don't think this will happen, it would destory the likes of Facebook and YouTube. They won't allow it to pass. Or they will at least have a strong objection to it.

Nope. The Big conglomerates are the ones that would benefit most from this sort of thing, they can afford the filters and licensing and taxes (by passing them on to the consumers) and would barely be affected. In fact, Facebook already has the apparatus in place.

It is the little guys, such as this site, who would be hurt, and badly.

Which means expediting Brexit is becoming more important, in this respect anyway.

 

-- and thanks for merging the threads,    I didn't realize there was already some attention being given to this subject.  Its the sort of thing that they always try to keep a secret until it's too late. ---

[Helen of Annoy]

I was unable to find anything credible, that would support this extreme interpretation.

It looks like that it starts from Julia Reda, of Pirate Party.

While I understand why Pirate Party would object any Internet restrictions or even regulations, is it realistic to just accept it, as an objective interpretation? Without having any other source, preferably not against regulations?

In other words, except Pirate Party, is there anyone non-anonymous that considers this an actual threat?

[Saru]

13 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

In other words, except Pirate Party, is there anyone non-anonymous that considers this an actual threat?

Aside from the two links I've already supplied:

https://savethelink.org/me

https://www.techspot.com/news/74113-european-copyright-directive-impose-link-tax-subsidize-publishers.html

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/eu-link-tax/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2018/05/08/eu-moves-closer-to-introducing-link-tax-no-exceptions-allowed/#35c9a2d113c9

http://www.alphr.com/politics/1009470/article-13-EU-what-is-it-copyright

https://boingboing.net/2018/05/28/futurecrime.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-copyright/eu-states-agree-rules-to-make-search-engines-pay-for-news-idUSKCN1IQ2NS

I could go on, there are countless articles on this topic.

This issue did not originate with, nor has anything to do with the Pirate Party or Anonymous.

[Helen of Annoy]

10 minutes ago, Saru said:

Aside from the two links I've already supplied:

https://savethelink.org/me

https://www.techspot.com/news/74113-european-copyright-directive-impose-link-tax-subsidize-publishers.html

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/eu-link-tax/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2018/05/08/eu-moves-closer-to-introducing-link-tax-no-exceptions-allowed/#35c9a2d113c9

http://www.alphr.com/politics/1009470/article-13-EU-what-is-it-copyright

https://boingboing.net/2018/05/28/futurecrime.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-copyright/eu-states-agree-rules-to-make-search-engines-pay-for-news-idUSKCN1IQ2NS

I could go on, there are countless articles on this topic.

This issue did not originate with, nor has anything to do with the Pirate Party or Anonymous.

So I sampled the links you gave me, chose Forbes, they cite Julia too. 

It seems the extreme interpretation does originate from the Pirate Party. No, not Anonymous, I didn't mean them, I meant non-anonymous, as in someone besides Julia who will agree with her, under their real name.   

[Saru]

16 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

So I sampled the links you gave me, chose Forbes, they cite Julia too. 

It seems the extreme interpretation does originate from the Pirate Party. No, not Anonymous, I didn't mean them, I meant non-anonymous, as in someone besides Julia who will agree with her, under their real name.   

You are cherry-picking references to Julia Reda and ignoring everything else.

What specifically do you consider 'extreme' about the interpretations cited and what is your interpretation of the proposed legislation ?

[Helen of Annoy]

11 minutes ago, Saru said:

You are cherry-picking references to Julia Reda and ignoring everything else.

What specifically do you consider 'extreme' about the interpretations cited and what is your interpretation of the proposed legislation ?

All right, I skimmed Reuters too and they are more concerned with how it may affect You Tube. Who's going to pay if there's something to pay to the actual author of a piece. If there's something to pay. There's art, for example, that was given/allowed to be shared by the authors, so there's nothing much to panic about. 

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but why should I be against paying the price to those who demand it? 

 

What's extreme in Julia's interpretation? Well, it's pretty extreme to stretch a regulation - that yet has to be voted on, that would recommend less piracy and more fairness to the actual authors - all the way to the 'killing memes'. (I don't remember, but I'm not sure she used that 'kill meme' meme at all. If she didn't, then her extreme interpretation was pushed to further extreme.)  

In short, the authors should be paid if their work comes for a price. No one mentioned any recommendation to stop the flow of free contents, or contents that was approved to be shared. By the author. Various search or social sites are not authors of the goods they're making business on. So, seriously, why should they have control over other people's work? 

(Just like the new privacy rules are returning the control over small user contents back to the user. Thank you, god almighty. It seemed it's the f-book that is the almighty for a while.) 

 

Of course the Pirate Party will disagree with curbing piracy. I mean, duh.

Personally, I'm happy with the way it is and the way I believe it will remain: lower quality reproductions are silently allowed/ignored. 

It's one thing to use a crappy screenshot for a meme and something totally else to pirate a whole movie and plaster/sell it around in full HD. Or profit from someone's article without paying the author their share. 

Of course, that would destroy the life of many of 'link warriors', but on the brighter side, it would make forums more about conversation and less about spamming. 

Besides, who would enforce the meme killing law, which does not exist, since there's only a suggested regulation aimed against profiting on piracy, if you look at it from a less panicky angle?           

[Saru]

13 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

It's one thing to use a crappy screenshot for a meme and something totally else to pirate a whole movie and plaster/sell it around in full HD. Or profit from someone's article without paying the author their share. Of course, that would destroy the life of many of 'link warriors', but on the brighter side, it would make forums more about conversation and less about spamming. 

The new proposed legislation is not about piracy or plagiarism, it's about limiting the concept of 'fair use' and controlling what content can be linked to.

Without fair use, even the abovementioned crappy screenshot used in a meme would violate copyright.

On a site such as UM, in a worst case scenario (based on this particular EU legislation) we'd be talking about:

• No quoting from any news site in the EU
• All linking to sites in the EU would need to be blocked
• No image hotlinking or uploading
• No front page news posting from any EU news sites

Now imagine these restrictions being placed on every forum, blog and social media site.

It would be highly damaging to the free sharing of information online.

[Helen of Annoy]

17 minutes ago, Saru said:

The new proposed legislation is not about piracy or plagiarism, it's about limiting the concept of 'fair use' and controlling what content can be linked to.

Without fair use, even the abovementioned crappy screenshot used in a meme would violate copyright.

On a site such as UM, in a worst case scenario (based on this particular EU legislation) we'd be talking about:

• No quoting from any news site in the EU
• All linking to sites in the EU would need to be blocked
• No image hotlinking or uploading
• No front page news posting from any EU news sites

Now imagine these restrictions being placed on every forum, blog and social media site.

It would be highly damaging to the free sharing of information online.

Worst case scenario, according to Pirate Party interpretation of proposed regulation that in effect would be a recommendation, not a law. 

Even that worst case does not prohibit your users from referring to certain piece. Only would prohibit you from claiming eventual profit from the handling of someone else's property, which is something f-book and similar were notorious for. I don't see you there. Or I'm mistaken, god knows it happens to me far too often. 

 

Look. 

If you want to panic about this, all I can say is 'what a strange hobby'. 

If you want to discuss it, I cannot wait for the moment it will be discussion, without the regular large quantity propaganda material posters.