Slashdot Mirror
EU Wants To Require Platforms To Filter Uploaded Content (Including Code) (github.com)
A new copyright proposal in the EU would require code-sharing platforms like GitHub and SourceForge to monitor all content that users upload for potential copyright infringement. "The proposal is aimed at music and videos on streaming platforms, based on a theory of a 'value gap' between the profits those platforms make from uploaded works and what copyright holders of some uploaded works receive," reports The GitHub Blog. "However, the way it's written captures many other types of content, including code."
Upload filters, also known as "censorship machines," are some of the most controversial elements of the copyright proposal, raising a number of concerns including: -Privacy: Upload filters are a form of surveillance, effectively a "general monitoring obligation" prohibited by EU law
-Free speech: Requiring platforms to monitor content contradicts intermediary liability protections in EU law and creates incentives to remove content
-Ineffectiveness: Content detection tools are flawed (generate false positives, don't fit all kinds of content) and overly burdensome, especially for small and medium-sized businesses that might not be able to afford them or the resulting litigation Upload filters are especially concerning for software developers given that: -Software developers create copyrightable works -- their code -- and those who choose an open source license want to allow that code to be shared
-False positives (and negatives) are especially likely for software code because code often has many contributors and layers, often with different licensing for different components
-Requiring code-hosting platforms to scan and automatically remove content could drastically impact software developers when their dependencies are removed due to false positives The EU Parliament continues to introduce new proposals for Article 13 but these issues remain. MEP Julia Reda explains further in a recent proposal from Parliament.
Upload filters, also known as "censorship machines," are some of the most controversial elements of the copyright proposal, raising a number of concerns including: -Privacy: Upload filters are a form of surveillance, effectively a "general monitoring obligation" prohibited by EU law
-Free speech: Requiring platforms to monitor content contradicts intermediary liability protections in EU law and creates incentives to remove content
-Ineffectiveness: Content detection tools are flawed (generate false positives, don't fit all kinds of content) and overly burdensome, especially for small and medium-sized businesses that might not be able to afford them or the resulting litigation Upload filters are especially concerning for software developers given that: -Software developers create copyrightable works -- their code -- and those who choose an open source license want to allow that code to be shared
-False positives (and negatives) are especially likely for software code because code often has many contributors and layers, often with different licensing for different components
-Requiring code-hosting platforms to scan and automatically remove content could drastically impact software developers when their dependencies are removed due to false positives The EU Parliament continues to introduce new proposals for Article 13 but these issues remain. MEP Julia Reda explains further in a recent proposal from Parliament.
$ git push ...
remote: Resolving deltas: 100% (2/2), completed with 2 local objects.
remote: error: GH013: Your push could infringe someone's copyright.
remote: If you believe this is a false positive (e.g., it's yours, open
remote: source, not copyrightable, subject to exceptions) contact us:
remote: https://github.com/contact
remote: We're sorry for interrupting your work, but automated copyright
remote: filters are mandated by the EU's Article 13.
To github.com/vollmera/atom.git
! [remote rejected] patch-1 -> patch-1 (push declined due to article 13 filters)
Seems like just putting up a website that targets the European market violates dozens of laws over there.
Can't think of a worse place to do business in the new economy.
The more freedom after speech in the USA becomes attractive again.
How did all that censorship work out for the Warsaw Pact nations?
Keep the population from talking and thinking?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Free speech matters aside, what they are wanting to implement is actually technologically impossible without so many false positives as to render the technology utterly useless even at best.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Nazis and their censorship. What the fuck is wrong you europe?
I'm sure all the clueless myopian companies that are lobbying for and bribing for this sort of legislation not only don't understand the technical problems, but they also probably expect humans to sit there and sift through terabytes of uploads to make sure there isn't a single copyrighted byte anywhere, and they couldn't care less what it costs to do that (so long as someone else foots the bill).
Wouldn't it be better to monitor the music and video interests for violations of the various GPL's?
I know there's jurisdictional creep, and maybe some large non-EU companies would adhere, but I really doubt the EU has the jurisdictional pull for this to do anything other than hamstring anything to do with hosting in the EU. I guess this is good for non-EU small and mid-sized businesses who will have a huge advantage when not operating in the EU, like the USA or maybe Ukraine. At the same time, I'd rather these quixotic EU bureaucrats not treat their own tech community so badly in the global market.
This is what happens when you give the power to regulate to a bunch of politicians and bureaucrats who have no idea how the internet works.
Sigh!
The meme 'open source', despite everyone and his cat embracing it these days, is still a meme to be eradicated in due time, by those that stand to benefit from its demise. We all know who they are. This is just one move in that grand scheme.
Open source code may fall under educational, research and preservation of cultural heritage. In addition, this
"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."
does not imply this
"Upload filters, also known as "censorship machines," are some of the most controversial elements of the copyright proposal,"
necessarily. We are talking about a directive that outlines specific implementations in the member countries. And particularly about the fact that a code sharing service is different from some other kinds of services. Nobody have asked to implement a filter, a license or attribution search tool like an idiot. Yet.
not really the writter's timeframe but we are way worst now, next step: logan's run
After mandatory terrorits quotas. More and
More Garbage come from Merkel&Bruxelles.
Most copyrighted closed source code is well closed source. How are they even going to match up infringements on copyright?
Most but not all of the source code out in the wild probably falls under a GNU or BSD style license. If anything the copyright enforcement should be going the other way, seeing as closed source products don't release their source, we have no real clue if any of those products are incorporating open source in them without the proper claims and code release.
Allow your program to execute code that is passed in as a variable.
If they want a robust and strong filter that would require giving the complete list of copyrighted content for comparison's sake. Just hashes wouldn't cut it as small changes can make the end hash. I guess this might be a net good idea then. It would mean they have to give the complete list of everything to anyone who opens a website that operates in Europe. Talk about a way to preserve past content for all future generations.
captcha: emulate
Translation: making copyright fees into a 'sales tax' on advertising revenue, for the big copyright holders anyway.
Harmonizing cross-border laws == reducing the rights of all consumers
Because numbskull beaurecrats paid to write legislation, have to write legislation. Like this rubbish.
clearly malfunctions. It produces garbage mostly.
I don't need to worry about that - APK keeps my host file fully updated!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
[voice=Nigel Farage] It's exactly this kind of nonsense that led to Brexit! [/]
Well, it might be if the thick sods in Barnsley and the like actually understood two words of it.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I'm going to mod this to -1 every time I see it because fuck Intel.
GitHub and SourceForge are both US-based. Why should they care about the crazy laws our dearest EU politicians make up?
anyone trying to upload code with it will be blocked. Seriously they are going to have a whole team investigating the applicability of copyright claims
I'm not a coder, so therefore not any sort of expert on the subject, but processors have instruction sets, and if you want it to do something, there's only so many ways to do it. So doesn't that make copywriting code a little absurd?
Instead of individual countries / regional governments coming up with daft rules on how the internet should operate, how about we recognise that we should have a global body with competence in this area?
Nice Post admin. I like the way you write a post, well explained. I will surely share this post. cheers !! from: Ramadan Kareem Wishes
Many parts of the eloquently written open source code will probably be used many times... and in proprietary software as well. Check out the source of many of these and you'll find the original comments from the author. Makes me kinda say fuckit with the whole copywrite thing... just want to code, If I find a better way of doing something, even better.
[($)]