EU and Internet Regulation

Jim Car

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
2,695
I thought it might be useful to start a general trend on the issue of the EU and its approach to regulation of the internet. If there is already a trend existing feel free to merge. I was hoping this would provide an area for general discussion rather then being one related to specific laws and issues like GDPR.

Obviously most people in the last moth have been preoccupied with GDPR especially those in business, however this is only one area relating primarily to data protection. The EU is also drafting and discussing various other laws that could potentially have a massive impact on the way the internet functions, for better or for worse.

So with that I will get us started. Another proposed EU law that again could have a massive impact but does not seem to have garnered much attention is the potential EU Copyright Reform. Its being sent to parliament and will be voted on at the end of next month. Many have criticised the law saying it could be a way to subsidise traditional media companies through a number of mechanisms. The one that seems to be getting the most attention is a potential "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.”

There would also be addition requirement regarding uploads and the need to get permission from anyone and everyone who could potential be cited within a video, and seemingly again no fair use exemption.

In short the new copyright law looks set to be an absolute disaster which will adversely effective forms and various other media platforms, include the like of youtube ect.

Interested to hear others thoughts and take on this and the EU approach in general to internet regulation. I won't pretend to be unbiased I think the idea of the EU trying to increasingly regulate the internet is horrendous and an incredibly regressive step, be that might just be me.
 


O'Quisling

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Messages
738
The pervasiveness of the internet will make it difficult to regulate. Unless there is some sort of crisis that the powers-that-be use to so.

What will happen instead is the increasing use of the Internet for the deepening of the EU.

The internet is an information medium that will be used in an ongoing way to Manufacture Consent for the contrived political entity, the EU.

Every component of the internet was used (not just social media platforms) in the 2012 ‘I want Europe’ initiative launched in Berlin.

info here

The funding for this large campaign shows who are in favour of the EU.
The I want Europe campaign group was made up of 11 philanthropic foundations called “The Committed Europeans”.

“The Committed Europeans” is led by the Mercator Foundation, whose activities are to the forefront of cultural education and integration in Europe. The I want Europe project was aimed to get ordinary citizens from across Europe to provide their personal reasons for why they like the EU.

These statements were seen in billboard advertisements as well as on the radio and TV. It was in the realm of the Internet, that the campaign really came into its own: youtube channels, facebook pages etc.

The initiative, under the patronage of German Federal President Joachim Gauck, was heavily promoted by the German media companies.

The group of eleven foundations were:
- Allianz Kultrstiftung (Allianz Cultural Foundation),
- Bertelsmann Stiftung (Bertelsmann Foundation),
- BMW Stiftung Herbert Quandt (Herbert Quandt BMW Foundation),
- Gemeinnützige Hertie Stiftung (the Hertie Non-profit Foundation),
- Robert Bosch Stiftung (Robert Bosch Foundation),
- Schering Stiftung (Schering Foundation),
- Schwarzkopf Stiftung „Junges Europa“ (Schwarzkopf Young Europe Foundation),
- Stiftung Genshagen (Genshagen Foundation),
- Stiftung Mercator (Mercator Foundation),
- Stiftung Zukunft Berlin (Zukunft Berlin Foundation),
and the Volkswagen Stiftung (Volkswagen Foundation)

The EU is a bosses' club extraordinaire !
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
55,014
I've noticed recently that I can no longer post or view comments on thehill.com. Im wondering does that have anything to do with the EU regulation? Also on other US sites I've noticed that to post on the comments page you have to click that you are consenting to data policies.
 

Apple in Eden

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,718
I thought it might be useful to start a general trend on the issue of the EU and its approach to regulation of the internet. If there is already a trend existing feel free to merge. I was hoping this would provide an area for general discussion rather then being one related to specific laws and issues like GDPR.

Obviously most people in the last moth have been preoccupied with GDPR especially those in business, however this is only one area relating primarily to data protection. The EU is also drafting and discussing various other laws that could potentially have a massive impact on the way the internet functions, for better or for worse.

So with that I will get us started. Another proposed EU law that again could have a massive impact but does not seem to have garnered much attention is the potential EU Copyright Reform. Its being sent to parliament and will be voted on at the end of next month. Many have criticised the law saying it could be a way to subsidise traditional media companies through a number of mechanisms. The one that seems to be getting the most attention is a potential "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.”

There would also be addition requirement regarding uploads and the need to get permission from anyone and everyone who could potential be cited within a video, and seemingly again no fair use exemption.

In short the new copyright law looks set to be an absolute disaster which will adversely effective forms and various other media platforms, include the like of youtube ect.

Interested to hear others thoughts and take on this and the EU approach in general to internet regulation. I won't pretend to be unbiased I think the idea of the EU trying to increasingly regulate the internet is horrendous and an incredibly regressive step, be that might just be me.
Yes very alarming. Article 13 as it is called has been endorsed by a MEP committee and will progress forward which will be a dark day. Amazing that so little is said on here about this or indeed yet another undemocratic decision by the two M's to move ahead with official Eurozone budgets are we brain dead or what?
 

gleeful

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2016
Messages
7,520
I dont see the disaster here. Copyright is already highly protected. Try upload a movie to youtube, for example. Or a song.

What will change?
 

Analyzer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
45,623
How did the nEU imperial scale attempt to regulate monetary policy work out, via the ECB ?

Oh yes....it produced boom&bust. Even the Brits have copped on that boom&bust is not sustainable. And the clowns running the monetary machine in Frankfurt are going full throttle on it.

Their legacy is the ongoing disaster in Greece, a crisis in Italy, and dormant crisis in Spain that is liable to blow up again now that the PSOE are back in power. Plus the French and Belgian debt bubbles.


I think it is beyond the competence of large scale regulatory frameworks to regulate anything, on a continental scale, in Europe.

The Americans, the Indians, and the Chinese can do scale regulation, but they don't have clowns like Juncker and Big Fill at the wheel.
 

Karloff

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
6,952
Much of Youtube's music video heritage will be voided if this goes through. People need to contact their MEPs who can still stop this little corporate lobbying stunt.
 

Karloff

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
6,952
I dont see the disaster here. Copyright is already highly protected. Try upload a movie to youtube, for example. Or a song.

What will change?
You upload a copyright video now, somebody complains, they take it down. This new proposal is about installing filters which would somehow automatically prevent it from going up in the first place.

On the face of it it looks like a digout for certain lobbyists but it also is an attack on freedom of speech, sharing information and internet freedom in general. It needs to be snuffed out along with the MEPs who voted for it. I wonder what the people who live in their constituency and who voted them into power think about it?
 

JamieD

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
3,291
I dont see the disaster here. Copyright is already highly protected. Try upload a movie to youtube, for example. Or a song.

What will change?
Article 13 mandates the use of filters to prevent copyright infringing content from being uploaded. As things stand, YouTube and other platforms typically use the DMCA as reference which has a fair use clause. So let's say I upload a video criticizing some news segment or something and use footage of the segment, and the news channel gets it removed with a DMCA takedown.. upon review it would likely be restored given the DMCA's fair use provisions.

YouTube can detect and block some content using its Content ID system, and other platforms have the same types of systems. Typically, they can tell the difference between a copyrighted work being fully uploaded, and elements of it being used as part of wider content.

Article 13 mandates a filter for all copyrighted works, so typically that could include even Internet memes uploaded to Twitter and so forth.

Basically, this and Article 11 could adversely affect the Internet and how its used throughout Europe. Article 11 is particularly stupid since it essentially says platforms have to pay news publishers for even snippets of their content being used in links that direct to it.

This is a blo0wjob from Brussels to publishers and copyright trolls at the cost of everyone else. Honestly, the tech giants should respond by blocking any reference to news sites and publishers in Europe from their platforms entirely.. then watch the European Commission go after them for doing that too!

EDIT: I also forgot to mention the impractical aspect of Article 13. As a result, any platform that accepts text, images, videos etc. from users should have to apply filters to detect and remove copyrighted works. How would a startup have such capabilities in the first place?

All you have to do is look at who opposed these two articles. Vint Cerf, Tim Berners-Lee, Jimmy Wales (for the clear threat it poses to Wikipedia!), Tim Wu (net neutrality guy) and plenty of lobbying groups like the CCIA, whose members include content owners too, like Netflix, are all opposed to this nonsense. The MEPs who voted in favor of this change apparently know more about the Internet than Internet and WWW pioneers. Typical of Brussels!
 
Last edited:

jmcc

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
42,697
I hate Brussels Nazis. This whole thing seems to be designed by f*cktard parasites.
 

Karloff

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
6,952

cyberianpan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
16,347
Website
www.google.com
GDPR has decreased the quality of my porn feed ... I am nearly tempted to go back out and feed on real live humans again

Cyp
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
GDPR has decreased the quality of my porn feed ... I am nearly tempted to go back out and feed on real live humans again

Cyp
I got White House Barbie for you, what more do you want?

She has an orange jumpsuit and handcuffs...
 

Karloff

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
6,952
“Instead of one Europe-wide law, we’d have 28, with the most extreme becoming the de-facto standard: To avoid being sued, international internet platforms would be motivated to comply with the strictest version implemented by any member state.”

Member of European Parliament Julia Reda

The sentence ‘Angela Merkel meets Theresa May,’ which could be a headline of a news article, cannot be protected by copyright, because it is a mere statement of fact and not an original creation. Mr. Voss said repeatedly that he wants these purely factual statements to be covered by Article 11
It will be a mighty straitjacket to control the wild beast that is free expression on the internet at last, a long time goal of the elites.

Some abuses which may lie in wait...

Politics

Doctorow gave us the example of a politically sensitive video uploaded to a platform just days before an election. Let’s call it the pee tape. If the target of the pee tape were to know it was about to be released, it could be uploaded to a content monitoring platform with a copyright claim lying in wait. The censorship filters would catch it before it was seen by the public, and the election could come and go while a legal fight plays out behind the scenes...

Surveillance

There’s also the issue of surveillance. We already accept that companies like Facebook hire people to comb through our ************************ while trying to identify infringing content. The EU is trying to force many more companies to deputize a bunch of sleuths, human and algorithmic, expand this shadow surveillance state that monitors everything we post on these platforms. As Doctorow put it to us, “Any kind of censorship in the modern age is surveillance.”

Music

Remixes and mashups are ************************************. Any artist that relies on fair use to make transformative works is ************************************. And the Metallica’s of the world who love running around policing where their work will have platforms, and their grunts making sure to pull down that birthday party video of you and your friends just trying to have a good time while some song was on the radio. Are you wearing a Rick and Morty shirt in that perfect profile pic? Sorry, the stupid algorithm flagged it, and now it’s gone.

Memes

Even if you think that people who pirate music should be executed and all news organizations are the devil, you probably like memes. Well, whoever took a picture of that one guy looking at that one girl instead of the other girl, will be having a field day running around filing complaints against any platform that uses it without permission. Just kidding, that guy sold the photo to iStock, a subsidiary of photo-licensing giant Getty Images.
https://gizmodo.com/the-end-of-all-thats-good-and-pure-about-the-internet-1826963763
 

Karloff

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
6,952
Tell them to block Articles 11 and 13

lynn.boylan@ep.europa.eu
nessa.childers@ep.europa.eu
matt.carthy@ep.europa.eu
lukeming.flanagan@ep.europa.eu
marian.harkin@ep.europa.eu
liadh.niriada@ep.europa.eu
marian.harkin@ep.europa.eu

They vote in next few days

You can use the following draft for the email.

Dear Member of the European Parliament,

I’m writing to you as a concerned citizen to raise my concerns regarding Article 13 of the proposal for a Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market. I kindly ask you vote against the version of Article 13 that was proposed by the Legal Affairs Committee of the European Parliament.

The heated debate in the Council and the European Parliament shows that a significant proportionate of MEPs and member states are not convinced about Article 13.

I strongly believe that important safeguards are missing from the text. The proposed Article 13 conflicts with several provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, contradicts existing procedures established by EU law for dealing with the removal of copyrighted material and is contrary to existing case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Article 13 would interfere with the right to the protection of personal data (Article 8 of the Charter), because it requires internet service providers to monitor everything uploaded by users. The software that reviews and filters content will be processing personal data without the positive consent of the data subject.

Article 13 would interfere with the right to freedom of expression and information (Article 11 of the Charter) because it requires internet service providers to prevent images, information, videos and other means of expression from being uploaded to the internet. In particular, automated filtering software is notoriously inaccurate and is likely to catch lawful materials that do not breach copyright and that are essential for societal and political debate and comment, such as parody or quotation. A general obligation to monitor everything a user uploads to the internet is likely to cause a chilling effect on free speech.

Article 13 would also interfere with the freedom to conduct a business (Article 16 of the Charter) because it requires internet service providers to install, maintain and operate costly software at their own expense.

The interferences with Articles 8, 11 and 16 of the Charter pursue a legitimate aim: that of protecting intellectual property. However, the scale of these interferences is disproportionate to the legitimate aim. That is because intellectual property can be protected adequately through other means that are less intrusive with regard to all three of the aforementioned rights. And that is because important safeguards to protect fundamental rights are missing from the proposed Directive.

Therefore, I kindly ask you to vote against the version of Article 13 that was proposed by the Legal Affairs Committee. It is important to continue to revise Article 13 in order to implement safeguards to fundamental rights.

Sincerely yours,
 

jimbohane

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
842
I've noticed recently that I can no longer post or view comments on thehill.com. Im wondering does that have anything to do with the EU regulation? Also on other US sites I've noticed that to post on the comments page you have to click that you are consenting to data policies.
That has been going on for a while with the US sites probably due to legal advice given to the site owners.
 

robut

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
8,729
EU lawmakers against opening talks with EU countries on copyright reform

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - EU lawmakers rejected on Thursday the tough position recommended by a key committee on an overhaul of EU copyright rules which aim to make tech giants such as Google and Facebook share revenues with publishers, broadcasters and artists.

The revamp has triggered strong criticism from Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, World Wide Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee, net neutrality expert Tim Wu, internet pioneer Vint Cerf and others.

Europe’s broadcasters, publishers and artistes such as Paul McCartney back the overhaul, saying it would level the playing field for contents holders.

A total of 318 law makers voted against opening talks with EU countries based on the committee’s proposal while 278 voted in favor, and 31 abstained.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top