Forums / Discussion / General

On 25 May, the European Council agreed to a negotiating position on the draft copyright directive. This will allow the presidency of the Council to start negotiations with the European Parliament on mass monitoring and filtering of internet uploads and a chaotic new “ancillary copyright” measure that will make it harder to link to and quote news sources.

Sources:
https://edri.org/eu-member-states-agree-on-monitoring-filtering-of-internet-uploads/

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvXOfq3AB8s

Sign the Petition (people not from the EU can sign as well):
https://saveyourinternet.eu/

Great even the supposed ultra liberal EU are also trying to break the internet, hard to find anyone who cares about the interests of non-rich people this days. I fear for our future

First we had to deal with Net Neutrality being removed and now we have this. Why is there a sudden surge of people wanting to take away our internet? I literally don't understand; it's like we can't catch a break here…

What makes it even more ironic is that just recently, every company was forced to change their privacy plan in accordance to the EU's General Protection Data Regulation, ensuring that people would be less spied on and now we get slapped in the face with…this.

At least link to the proposal in question will ya?
Here you go

Here's the dreaded article that will doom the internet

Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter.
2.
Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1.
3.
Member States shall facilitate, where appropriate, the cooperation between the information society service providers and rightholders through stakeholder dialogues to define best practices, such as appropriate and proportionate content recognition technologies, taking into account, among others, the nature of the services, the availability of the technologies and their effectiveness in light of technological developments.

Y'all exaggerating.
We've already debunked it in the discord so i'm just gonna quote Triangle:

"This is about the enforcement of intellectual property copyrights, should the rightholder (aka. person who uploaded content) wish it.
It does not impact creative commons.
Unless someone goes through the trouble of registering their content under a copyright license, where it becomes their intellectual property.
WHICH IS, mind you, already a thing.
This article essentially says "in content-sharing sites produced by users, the site will cooperate with the creator to enforce their copyright laws should they wish it"
News sites are most definitely NOT "Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users"

Oh for fucks sake.

Superjumpman is right. The outrage seems heavily overblown – first off, the European Parliament will have to vote on the proposal and amend it. Secondly, the document itself is from 2016.

And most importantly, what those media sources are writing about it does not match the actual text that Superjumpman posted. It's just not there. Both of the linked sites are anti-GDPR, and most likely found and twisted the proposal to take away from the success for user internet privacy that it is. The Youtuber in question clearly carters to the alt-lite US viewers, with amazing videos like "Progressives are ruining Ireland" (because there is no longer a 100% ban on abortions and gay marriage), "NBC’s Disgraceful Hit Piece on Jordan Peterson" and so on.

As a matter of fact, it's very hard to navigate to find the document in question on https://saveyourinternet.eu/ – it is somewhat hidden behind 3 clicks, without being properly labeled as the controversial document itself, buried in a mass of other links, videos similar to the ones OP linked, and a "dissection" commentary on the document that all precede the link to the law itself.

In other words, what I smell here is a facilitated outrage, a US-centric and EU-sceptical knee-jerk reaction to GDPR, which has a somewhat global effect due to the extended effects of the free market (hard/impossible to distinguish EU internet users, sites therefore alter services globally to comply to EU standards).

I'm always extremely wary of any time a government wants to meddle with the Internet and its functions, so even taking the above into account I'm not trusting of this in the slightest.

Are you aware that the principle of Net Neutrality or copyright laws (like this proposition) stem from the actions of a government? Governments can have both a positive and a negative impact on the internet and how it is used, so it's important to look at their decisions on a case-by-case basis rather than a generalized, simplified perspective of "good/bad".

Basically, porn, "hate speech", copyright infringement, terrorism or any stuff like that are used as a scapegoat to censor the Internet.

Well, thanks for clarifying this issue for us, SuperJumpMan.

Even if it is overblown, it's still a step backwards that includes enforcing laws that just don't fit modern society and laws that benefit very few.

Jeez, why the sudden Bipolar attitude EU? First you gave us the glorious GDPR, and now you gave us this shit? Make up your fucking minds already, EU.

Also that new GDPR came so quickly and was almost not discussed about prior to that thing being approved.

>guy in politics vaguely points in the direction of the internet
>internet goes absolutely bananas

Y'all actually need internet monitoring, to protect you from your own idiocy.

I couldn't agree more.

We're all just frightened children on the internets.

As much as I am against bullshit internet copyright laws. Yeah, the fact that it will "destroy the internet" is complete hyperbole.

I don't care about the internet, or anything else really, and I have no idea what's going on, but I'm just glad we're hating on the EU.

How about we destroy the EU before it destroys the internet or anything else you guys like?

But what happens if these changes are applied…gradually so no one notices at first?

Speaking as a (admittedly ultra-obscure) original content creator, I'm against the very concept of copyright to begin with. The fact that it's aimed towards the internet doesn't sway my opinion in the least. That said, while it still exists, this seems a reasonably efficient method of dealing with it.

EDIT: For bonus clarification, I'm based in the EU.

Have you noticed that the more those things go on, the less they've talked about on the Internet. Is this a tactic? To desensitize general public?

I also noticed that when PIPA, SOPA, ACTA and other things were in progress, there were massive sitewide protests. Why is that not the case with Articles 11, 13 or 15 that would devastate the websites?