Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday March 25 2019, @11:50PM   Printer-friendly
from the no-comment© dept.

The EU votes on a confusing new copyright law Tuesday

On Tuesday, the European Parliament will vote on an overhaul of the EU's copyright system. The body will vote on a compromise announced last month that has received the backing of key European governments. An earlier version of the proposal was approved by the European Parliament last September.

The legislation is controversial, with two provisions receiving the bulk of the criticism. Article 11 aims to help news organizations collect more licensing fees from news aggregators like Facebook and Google News. Article 13 aims to help copyright holders to collect licensing fees from user-generated content platforms like YouTube and Facebook.

Both provisions are maddeningly vague—laying out broad goals without providing much detail about how those goals can be achieved. This is partly because the EU's lawmaking system occurs in two stages. First, EU-wide institutions pass a broad directive indicating how the law should be changed. Then each of the EU's member nations translates the directive into specific laws. This process leaves EU-wide legislators significant latitude to declare general policy goals and leave the details to individual countries.

Still, if the legislation's goals are incoherent or contradictory, then something is going to have to give. And critics warn that the package could wind up damaging the Internet's openness by forcing the adoption of upload filters and new limits on linking to news stories.

See also: Tomorrow's copyright vote explained (Julia Reda)


Original Submission

Related Stories

Europe's Controversial Overhaul of Online Copyright Receives Final Approval 42 comments

Europe's Controversial Overhaul of Online Copyright Receives Final Approval:

Articles 11 and 13 both approved by European politicians.

The European Union has given its final approval to the Copyright Directive, a controversial package of legislation designed to update copyright law in Europe for the online age.

Members of the European Parliament voted 348 in favor of the law, 274 against.

For advocates of the legislation, the directive will balance the playing field between US tech giants and European content creators, giving copyright holders more power over how big internet platforms distribute their content. But critics say the law is vague and poorly thought-out, and will restrict how content is shared online, stifling free speech in the process.

Politicians have been debating the legislation for more than two years now, with fierce lobbying from both tech giants and copyright holders pushing the argument back and forth. Despite some setbacks, though, the most controversial clauses of the Copyright Directive have remained intact, and were approved today with only minor changes.

Julia Reda, an MEP from Germany's Pirate Party, said the passing of the law marked "a dark day for internet freedom."

What changes, if any, will this cause where you work?

Previously: EU Copyright Directive Vote Set for Tuesday


Original Submission

Poland Challenges EU Copyright Directive 19 comments

The government of Poland has filed a complaint with the European Court of Justice against coypright rules adopted in April.

"This system may result in adopting regulations that are analogous to preventive censorship, which is forbidden not only in the Polish constitution but also in the EU treaties," Deputy Foreign Minister Konrad Szymanski told public broadcaster TVP Info.

Notably, Poland opposed the measure, and did so

despite the national newspapers running blank front pages the day before the key vote, with op-eds threatening retaliation against Polish politicians who crossed them.

The directive passed by five votes, but possibly it shouldn't have included the two most controversial provisions.

In the EU, if a Member of the Parliament presses the wrong button on a vote, they can have the record amended to show what their true intention was, but the vote is binding.

Today, the European Parliament voted to pass the whole Copyright Directive without a debate on Articles 11 and 13 by a margin of five votes.

But actually, a group of Swedish MEPs have revealed that they pressed the wrong button, and have asked to have the record corrected. They have issued a statement saying they'd intended to open a debate on amendments to the Directive so they could help vote down Articles 11 and 13.

Previous coverage
Europe's Controversial Overhaul of Online Copyright Receives Final Approval
EU Copyright Directive Vote Set for Tuesday
It Sure Sounds Like Elizabeth Warren Wants To Bring The EU Copyright Directive Stateside
Tens of thousands rally across Europe protesting EU Copyright 'Reform'
Protesters Will March Against the European Copyright Directive on the 23rd, Ahead of Final Vote


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by exaeta on Tuesday March 26 2019, @12:11AM

    by exaeta (6957) on Tuesday March 26 2019, @12:11AM (#819816) Homepage Journal

    Hopefully the vote fails.

    If not, there may be a market for a U.S. based news aggregator/news search engine and isn't bound by E.U. law to thrive. Just make sure you have no plans to visit the E.U. and you're golden!

    --
    The Government is a Bird
  • (Score: 1) by RandomFactor on Tuesday March 26 2019, @12:52AM (2 children)

    by RandomFactor (3682) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 26 2019, @12:52AM (#819823) Journal

    It is also widely protested [soylentnews.org]

    --
    В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:41AM (1 child)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:41AM (#819839) Journal

      There's a precedent [reuters.com]. So, yes, we've seen a protest against rampant copyright.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 1) by RandomFactor on Tuesday March 26 2019, @02:32AM

        by RandomFactor (3682) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 26 2019, @02:32AM (#819864) Journal

        Sounds like the same crowd

        --
        В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by physicsmajor on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:14AM (3 children)

    by physicsmajor (1471) on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:14AM (#819831)

    I know this site has a predominantly US readership, but this is a tremendous and very frightening issue. If passed, the exact same machinery to enforce copyright can easily be turned on images of a certain red hat, or text that favors a given candidate - automatic censorship. At least right now sites like Gab can exist. Furthermore, by requiring such algorithms they entrench every existing big player (because it's too prohibitive to build a new competitor site without the data to drive the algorithm, startups are toast). In addition to everything else, it's horribly anti-capitalist.

    This is not a drill. Please reach out to anyone you know in the EU, and tell them to contact their representatives. By phone, not just signing a faceless petition. We need to have their phone lines off the hook from now until the vote happens.

    I sincerely hope it isn't just Wikipedia that makes a big public stand here. Google at the very least should go dark in solidarity. GitHub as well. Twatter and the Book of Faeces are too far gone to protest.

    • (Score: 2) by darkfeline on Tuesday March 26 2019, @04:18AM (2 children)

      by darkfeline (1030) on Tuesday March 26 2019, @04:18AM (#819918) Homepage

      I'm from the US and this scares me. I see the US going to shit so I want to keep my options open, but everywhere else is going to shit just as fast if not faster.

      My current plan is to think happy thoughts.

      --
      Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26 2019, @02:21PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26 2019, @02:21PM (#820090)

        You can always do like the old days, be a pirate! We can't do anything about stupid laws forced upon us by a strong force of powerful and stupid, but we can have our fun in the tunnels beneath society.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @10:46AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @10:46AM (#820573)

          If you truly care about liberty, now is the time to put your money, ethics, and hardships where your mouth is, and make a difference, because if not you, who? And if not now, when?

          We're rapidly approaching a last chance at liberty without leaving the planet.

  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday March 26 2019, @02:15AM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 26 2019, @02:15AM (#819854) Journal

    aims to help news organizations collect more licensing fees

    aims to help copyright holders to collect licensing fees

    Where were all these concerned legislators when the buggy whip factories were closing down? Where will they be when the last factory producing internal combustion engines closes?

  • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Tuesday March 26 2019, @03:03AM

    by RamiK (1813) on Tuesday March 26 2019, @03:03AM (#819879)

    the legislation's goals are incoherent or contradictory

    The reason the laws are so broad in scope is because the different member states are in disagreement on how and which aggressive steps they're to take. So, the laws remain just vague enough for everyone to be able to do exactly what they want to do without pissing off their neighbors.

    If it sounds weird, it's how the United States was supposed to work before the federalists took over.

    --
    compiling...
  • (Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday March 26 2019, @03:10AM (3 children)

    by bzipitidoo (4388) on Tuesday March 26 2019, @03:10AM (#819884) Journal

    Why is it that proposals that are opposed by 80% or more of the people won't die and stay dead? The answer is, in a word, corruption. People the world over do not want extreme copyright.

    I also wonder at the plutocrats who want more, more, more, and can't ever satisfy their greed. What's with these people who are bribing the politicians? They have mental issues. Even if they can understand that the host will turn on them if they don't ease up on their parasitic bloodsucking, they can't stop themselves.

    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday March 26 2019, @06:12AM

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 26 2019, @06:12AM (#819977) Journal

      What's with these people who are bribing the politicians? They have mental issues.

      MDC have/had mental issues. Greed is not a medical condition.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 2) by loonycyborg on Tuesday March 26 2019, @07:10AM (1 child)

      by loonycyborg (6905) on Tuesday March 26 2019, @07:10AM (#819990)

      The whole idea of copyright is extreme. There is no particular reason that giving monopolies is appropriate way to "reward" creators. Only reason it exists as is is because it's based on older institution which was used for ideology control, by organizations like Spanish Inquisition. Copyright basically means some publishers are allowed to print particular things by inquisition because arrangements were made that things they print are not "religiously harmful". Later it got hijacked by publishers to make their lives easier by limiting competition. But in XXI century the core role of copyright is coloring cultural makeup of people based on their social class, so there would be rich culture and poor culture. That's how access fees will work out if copyright is enforced as written and that's the end result that enforcement efforts seek. Otherwise there is nothing to do since publishers already turn in enough profits, too much in fact. Abolition of copyright is in order instead, since there is no reason to keep ideology control and there is no reason to rebrand it into something else.

      • (Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:59AM

        by bzipitidoo (4388) on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:59AM (#820483) Journal

        True, true. Copyright originated from censorship. In the Late Middle Ages, the Catholic Church wanted to keep Christianity mysterious, keep the words out of the hands of the laity. Suited them just fine that hardly anyone could understand services and scripture in Latin. Put priests in the position of being the gatekeepers, the only ones who could tell the common man what it was all about. The nobility often found it convenient to join forces with the church, to censor the somewhat different things that bothered them. There was already some precedent in place when Martin Luther and the Gutenberg Press upended their racket. There was a 1409 constitution that forbade the translation of the Bible. Had to get permission to translate, and to spread copies around. Officially, the church was only interested in preventing inaccurate translations from being taken as Gospel, a not unreasonable purpose.

        The first to print an English translation of the Bible was William Tyndale, in the early 1500s. He did not have permission. The church had him strangled and burnt at the stake.

  • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Tuesday March 26 2019, @08:12AM

    by maxwell demon (1608) on Tuesday March 26 2019, @08:12AM (#820006) Journal

    Apparently the whole thing is part of a dirty deal. France wanted draconian copyright, Germany wanted the Russian gas pipeline. So they made a dirty deal: Germany won't weaken the copyright directive, France will accept the pipeline.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/Senficon/status/1110278976654794753 [twitter.com]

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  • (Score: 2) by looorg on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:18PM (1 child)

    by looorg (578) on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:18PM (#820070)

    That turd passed (348 yes, 274 no, 36 abstain/absent votes) and should now be implemented within two years.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by stretch611 on Tuesday March 26 2019, @04:42PM

      by stretch611 (6199) on Tuesday March 26 2019, @04:42PM (#820164)

      As much as I hate facebook, and the fact that google no longer "does no evil"; I hope that both of them block all relevant services in the EU. Google did this in Spain about 5 years ago and I remember the Spainish newspapers saw website traffic drop like a rock afterwards.

      --
      Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:28PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:28PM (#820075)

    It's done

(1)