That was the only paragraph of the default message I left in haha
The EU process is difficult to follow. Assuming the amended proposals go through, this is largely people shouting over issues that donât exist. Even L1 gave it a passing 5 second mention in the news, no one really seems to care.
The opposition has been poor imo, the tin foil hat routine has I think damaged any support there could have been to improve weak areas of this proposal, though I would say that there have been good improvements to it without the opposition anyway.
I expect that the amendments will be largely accepted and hope it will go through with those amendments. It seems unlikely it would go through without them. Though I expect it could go back to get more touching up before being finally approved to pass as legislation.
1 Like
The amended proposal form the original authors does not really do anything major. It still lead to filters just with a few extra restrictions. Better but still bad.
But in the process there are also other amendment proposals. For article 13 there are 5-6 from different parties. The parliament is supposed to choose one between them. There is no single change that it is supposed to be decided on. there are many options for the MEPs to choose from.
Reda has sources for each of the proposals : https://juliareda.eu/2018/09/copyright-showdown/
I do not see how they are tin foil hatting when the opposition is the only ones that make things clear and provide actual sources for everything and make specific proposals. In what way do you find the oppositionâs proposal counter productive here: https://juliareda.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Copyright_Sept12_Reda.pdf
1 Like
Got one reply, which is decent (ignoring my general disapproval of their party). Nice to see that they tried to get articles 11 and 13 abolished completely.
1 Like
The best way to combat this would be to probably overwhelm websites with memes, show them how CONTROLLABLE and REASONABLE their requests are! lol
1 Like
I guess we wait for the trilogue negotiations and the final vote now.
Can I get a brief summary of whatâs going on here? Not in EU but I wanna get an idea of what theyâre doing because I see the US attempting a SOPA on steroids soon if they arenât already
This post give a good overview of resources: https://old.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/9el2ub/on_the_eu_copyright_reform_iv_second/
Do not forget. This is not the final vote. It is about the formulation of the law. Now it will go through a new round of deliberation between parliament and council. And also the individual member states get involved iirc. And if it passes through the final vote might be somewhere at 2019. Maybe even after the next EU election thus who you will send to the parliament might really matter next year.
Iâm not sure they do. Look at the news articles that donât provide sources and use doomsday end of the world writing, it gains no sympathy from anyone because its ridiculous. Because of that youâre going to put off support from some people.
Calling it a âlink taxâ is also simply factually untrue and imo loses its credibility as an argument. Its not a tax and suggesting it is is simply a lie.
Similarly the use of the phrase âcensorship machinesâ is simply also incorrect.
The title of this topic âdistopiaâ
Almost everyone involved who are publicly against this legislation have imo tarnished it with their choice of wording that does nothing but give people a good reason to completely dismiss you. It could have been better handled.
On the other hand, the proponents of the proposal have done almost nothing and are flying through, just a few amendments etc.
This is disgusting. If this becomes a law then Europeâs digital economy will be severly crippled. It will be like a boy with a downâs syndrome. Managing to survive but unable to get anything done on their own.
Now that i think about it UK leaving EU wasnât such a bad thing after all.
Point proven?
Specifically what is?
Iâm trying to stay out of this because not only do I not live in the affected area, but Iâm not well versed on the issueâŚ
I suggest others follow suit if one or more of the above apply.
1 Like
I donât have a dog in this fight, but Iâm curious if this will lead to more blocking of sites for EU citizens.
I didnât realize it, but apparently the EU is blocking sites, outside of the EU, that donât follow GDPR. While browsing /r/pfsense I saw âHow Toâsâ posted on how to access sites that were being blocked. Since the EU doesnât have jurisdiction over sites that donât have a physical presence in the EU, this is what they chose to do.
In 2008, Content ID proved how using algorithms to police content just stifles fair use. 10 years later, itâs now law in the EU.
Forget âWhereâs the fair use?â Itâs now farewell fair use.
Google cannot possibly police people uploading signatures for Content ID matches and cannot anticipate how a malicious party can EASILY takedown a popular video simply by using a lawyer agency that re-uploads original content as a signature to stifle the original, and itâs sided TOWARDS big paying lawyers.
The algorithm with deep learning is only making the situation worse. It now identifies no matter how short the content is. No fair use. Itâs fully dead.
They give more weight to pre-existing channels that have partnerships with faster appeals, but even big channels like Channel Awesome get no free lunch sometimes.
Once again, Hereâs the Nostalgia Critic with âWhereâs the fair use?â (and the answer, is it no longer exists)
TL;DR: Deep Learning makes it so much easier to kill fair use, and itâs currently active.
The EFFâs response:
1 Like
The EU isnât blocking any sites itâs the sites blocking the EU so they can keep tracking you without disclosing who they are sending the information to.
And I see two more dooms day articles have been postedâŚ
Got any source on that? Seems easy to say when no one cites any real evidence.
You can also read the GDPR legislation.
There is no law requiring EU countries to block sites that donât follow GDPR, it would also be impossible to do so.
You can look up news articles about it as well. Itâs the sites blocking users because they donât want to follow the law. Following it would require that the clearly lay out what third party sites are setting cookies and tracking data on you for just one example. So instead they block you.
The burden of proof isnât on me to disprove the claim unless there is evidence to back the claim.