Copyright Law Could Put End To Net Memes (bbc.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Memes, remixes and other user-generated content could disappear online if the EU's proposed rules on copyright become law, warn experts. Digital rights groups are campaigning against the Copyright Directive, which the European Parliament will vote on later this month. The legislation aims to protect rights-holders in the internet age. But critics say it misunderstands the way people engage with web content and risks excessive censorship. The Copyright Directive is an attempt to reshape copyright for the internet, in particular rebalancing the relationship between copyright holders and online platforms. Article 13 states that platform providers should "take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rights-holders for the use of their works." Critics say this will, in effect, require all internet platforms to filter all content put online by users, which many believe would be an excessive restriction on free speech. There is also concern that the proposals will rely on algorithms that will be programmed to "play safe" and delete anything that creates a risk for the platform.

Comments

Let me refer you to Lt. Cmdr Data

[nitehawk214]

Here is his reaction after hearing about this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Copyright law globally is becoming impossible

[rickb928]

The US is facing a bill to extend copyright another 70 years. And to prevent much 'old' content from going into the public domain.

Corporations are wrecking copyright by claiming rights for their 'lifetime', which for virtually every corporation is 'forever'.

Digital content is also virtually perpetual, which makes perpetual rights both rational (if you believe that) and possible. Physical media such as paintings will eventually face the problem of being replicated to be preserved, and then the inevitable fight over rights of this 'perpetual' replica as a replacement.

And the Internet has thrived on fair use, which was tolerated until it became widespread and actually practical to use.

We need to reconsider letting copyright become perpetual, that it become limited to reasonable protection, and see if Mickey Mouse actually fades away...

Implementation cost

[Sarten-X]

Critics say this will, in effect, require all internet platforms to filter all content put online by users

I run a forum. I already have to deal with the occasional spam that gets through the registration system, and now I have to check everything my users say to see if someone else has already said it? No, thanks.

I've also built a few web applications, some of which accept user-submitted content. Do I now need to integrate that with a third-party scanning tool to enforce filtering? I'd really rather not, just from a licensing and contracting perspective...

I also note this comes hot on the heels of the GDPR. I guess it's time for another new privacy policy update, to tell folks that the information they submit (which might possibly be personally-identifiable) will now be handed off to a copyright scanner and checked to see if they dared to have an unoriginal thought...

With all due respect, fuck that.

Re:Article 27 GDPR was the breaking point

[Rakarra]

"Representative service can cost thousands of USD per year"

Oh noes! How will the multinational conglomerates worth billions of dollars on the open market be able to handle such a cost?

It's also a very high barrier to any smaller business trying to start in Europe or expand into it. But it's not like the immediate effect of regulations shutting down a business, it's more that you have no idea what businesses could have started up if the barriers to entry weren't so high. But since that's an unknown, we tend not to think about it very much, and thus undervalue what those barriers are actually costing us, because we're only considering sticking it to the big boys. Well anything applied uniformly hits the smaller guy a lot harder than the big guy.