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.

Comments

first post

[Anonymous Coward]

$ 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)

The more the EU embraces censorship

[AHuxley]

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?

Re:The more the EU embraces censorship

[AHuxley]

AC:
In the US you are free to give a speech.
To publish a book. To write a message about the news online. To engage in any political discussions about politics and talk about any part of history.
In the USA you don't have to be a government approved reporter or academic to comment within set laws about politics or history.
In the USA you are still free after the speech.
In the USA a person is still free after researching a book. A person is free to publish a book. The author can self publish. The author and publisher do not face jail time for the content of a political or history book.
In the USA you can upload an interview talking about your book to people who are free to ask any question about the book.
Nation in the EU would try to investigate everyone at all such events.
The US supports the freedom to talk about the book in public.
The EU supports nations investigating anyone who reads a book.
To give an interview about their book that mentions politics or history. The freedom to give talks about history. To go online and join in any discussion about their book.
The USA protects their citizens from any gov that wants to ban their publication and free speech.
In the EU a nations police record the speech.
The EU nation then investigates the person speaking, their work, their bank accounts, their politics, any publications. Who they are and what they do.
What was the topic and why did the person think they have a right to give speeches?
An EU nation starts a formal investigative police interview into why a person wanted to write a book. Has the person go over the political content of their speech in a formal legal setting.
The EU nations then support and consider court action and fines for speech.
The EU supports its nations using jail time to stop speech.
The US is the freedom to publish and talk again on any topic. The EU supports jail time for talking for the first time.