Andres Guadamuz has written a blog post analyzing why last Thursday's vote by the JURI Committee to reject fast-tracking the proposal concerning "harmonization" of copyright in the EU went as it did. The rejection of fast-tracking means that the issue will still come up for a general vote in parliament in September but the interesting part is that for the first time in Europe a wide coalition has managed to defeat powerful media lobbies, at least for now. He goes into how this was possible and what needs to happen in September.
The main result of this change from a political standpoint is that now we have two lobbying sides in the debate, which makes all the difference when it comes to this type of legislation. In the past, policymakers could ignore experts and digital rights advocates because they never had the potential to reach them, letters and articles by academics were not taken into account, or given lip service during some obscure committee discussion just to be hidden away. Tech giants such as Google have provided lobbying access in Brussels, which has at least levelled the playing field when it comes to presenting evidence to legislators.
Earlier on SN:
The EU's Dodgy Article 13 Copyright Directive has Been Rejected (2018)
EU Committee Approves Controversial Copyright Directive (2018)
Censorship Machines Are Coming: It’s Time for the Free Software Community to Use its Political Clout (2018)
Mulled EU Copyright Shakeup Will Turn Us Into Robo-Censors (2018)
EU Study Finds Even Publishers Oppose the "Link Tax" (2017)
Related Stories
Julia Reda, Member of the European Parliament representing Germany, writes about a EU study which finds that even publishers oppose the proposed "link tax" which is currently up for consideration by legislators. Interestingly, the report also finds that many journalists are afraid to cover the issue. Several publications declined to comment giving various reasons, including differences of view between the online editions and their parent publications. In other words, the subject is being silenced.
The report, a bit misleadingly entitled "Strengthening the Position of Press Publishers and Authors and Performers in the Copyright Directive" [warning for PDF], was commissioned by the European Parliament's Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the JURI committee. Specifically it reviews Article 11 and Articles 14-16 of the proposed Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. Julia Reda also notes that many of the MEPs are not in a position to find out about the report prior the vote. That puts them in a situation of making a less informed decision than is desirable.
Submitted via IRC for Bytram
Code-repository GitHub has raised the alarm about a pending European copyright proposal could force it to implement automated filtering systems – referred to by detractors as "censorship machines" – that would hinder developers working with free and open source software.
The proposal, part of Article 13 of the EU Copyright Directive from 2016, has been working its way through the legislative process.
In a blog post on Wednesday GitHub explained that the shakeup was designed to address the perception that there's a "value gap" between the money streaming-media platforms make from uploaded content and what content creators actually get paid.
"However, the way it's written captures many other types of content, including code," San Francisco-based GitHub said.
If passed, the rules would require code hosting platforms to take preemptive action to prevent copyrighted material from being shared without the appropriate license.
[...] Julia Reda, a member of the European Parliament and a representative of the Pirate Party in Germany, argues that the proposed requirements would force GitHub to negotiate a license from every single developer and would "kill the platforms economy in Europe."
Source: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/03/15/eu_copyright_proposal_could_limit_github_code/
Julia Reda (a Member of the European Parliament from Germany) writes in her bog about upcoming censorship legislation in the European Union and a call to action for those most affected, specifically the Free Software community.
The starting point for this legislation was a fight between big corporations, the music industry and YouTube, over money. The music industry complained that they receive less each time one of their music videos is played on a video platform like YouTube than they do when their tracks are listened to on subscription services like Spotify, calling the difference the "value gap". They started a successful lobbying effort: The upload filter law is primarily intended to give them a bargaining chip to demand more money from Google in negotiations. Meanwhile, all other platforms are caught in the middle of that fight, including code sharing communities.
The lobbying has engrained in many legislators' minds the false idea that platforms which host uploads for profit are necessarily exploiting creators.
The fight affects both sides of the Atlantic because once bad rules are enacted on either side, it is not uncommon for calls for "harmonization" to come from the other.
Earlier on SN:
Mulled EU Copyright Shakeup Will Turn Us Into Robo-Censors
EU Parliament's Copyright Rapporteur Has Learned Nothing from Year-long Copyright Debate
European Commission Hides Copyright Evidence Again
A European parliament committee has voted in favour of the Copyright Directive, leaving tech giants like Google, Microsoft and Amazon in the lurch over publication rights.
The directive will force online publications to pay a portion of their revenues to publishers, and take on full responsibility for any copyright infringement on the internet.
As a result, any service that allows users to post text, sound, or video for public consumption must also implement an automatic filter to scan for similarities to known copyrighted works, censoring those that match.
The vote passed by the legal affairs committee is likely to be taken as the political body's official line during further EU negotiations next month, unless a new vote is forced by lawmakers appealing the decision.
Julia Reda has more details of the vote
The European Parliament has voted against a controversial proposed new copyright law that critics warned could imperil a free and open internet. The Copyright Directive, which contained the particularly concerning Article 13, was rejected by 318 votes to 278, with 31 abstentions. The EU's proposed copyright reforms will now be debated again in September, giving policymakers more time to discuss and refine the crucial dossier.
Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales told the BBC he hoped that the music industry could find a way to compromise before the September debate.
Don't think about filtering everything everyone uploads to the internet. Instead, he added, they should look to renegotiating deals with platforms such as YouTube to get "fairer remuneration".
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @06:08PM
The correct question is: What roles should government be playing in the organization of societal interaction?
Why are the men with guns setting the rules rather than enforcing the rules established voluntarily between individuals themselves?
This talk about "digital rights" is superficial, and will never be solved without looking deeper into the foundations of society.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @06:47PM
The correct question is: What roles should government be playing in the organization of societal interaction?
Why are the men with guns setting the rules rather than enforcing the rules established voluntarily between individuals themselves?
This talk about "digital rights" is superficial, and will never be solved without looking deeper into the foundations of society.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @07:22PM (9 children)
The correct question is: What roles should government be playing in the organization of societal interaction?
Why are the men with guns setting the rules rather than enforcing the rules established voluntarily between individuals themselves?
This talk about "digital rights" is superficial, and will never be solved without looking deeper into the foundations of society.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday July 09 2018, @07:26PM (8 children)
3 times is enough, you get it already?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @07:41PM
Maybe you guys should stop collapsing his comments.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @08:14PM (6 children)
I agree, marking him troll three times is plenty, you should probably cut it out now.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday July 09 2018, @09:37PM (5 children)
You mean marking *you* Troll three times? Good grief, do you think we're dumb? Piss off.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @09:47PM (2 children)
So, you're some kind of stupid; at the very least, you're paranoid.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday July 10 2018, @04:21AM (1 child)
It ain't paranoia if they're actually out to get you. And as to some kind of stupid, maybe; I do spend a lot of effort trying to improve the morals of people who don't seem to have the necessary underlying machinery for it on this site. That's kinda dumb I guess.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @08:35AM
Noble, yes... but of course dumb too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:21PM (1 child)
Not the same person, not that it matters, just someone else aware of the low bar for "trolling" around here. I'm really not sure what in the OP's statement caused his post to be marked a troll to begin with, let alone got under someone's skin enough to spend an afternoon trying desperately to keep it from being read.
The only one here trolling is you. Fuck off.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @07:01PM
exactly. the op makes an obvious, but true (and evidently seldom realized) statement and the boot licking slaves mark them troll. ridiculous morons.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday July 09 2018, @07:42PM (1 child)
Here's hoping they make sane decisions compared to our perpetual Mickey Mouse Copyright System.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @08:00PM
It literally is Mickey Mouse: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mickey%20mouse [urbandictionary.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @09:19PM (2 children)
I wonder if there is a way to move into other direction and whether those proposals exist.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday July 09 2018, @11:35PM (1 child)
Depends. How many representatives can you afford to bribe if you all pitch in?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @09:56AM
Depends on how crowd-funding is these days, I suppose.