European Parliament Votes in Favor of Controversial Copyright Laws (engadget.com)

The EU has voted on copyright reform, with members of European Parliament this time voting in favor of the extremely controversial Articles 11 and 13. The 438 to 226 vote, described as "the worst possible outcome" by some quarters, could have significant repercussions on the way we use the internet. From a report: The Copyright Directive, first proposed in 2016, is intended to bring the issue of copyright in line with the digital age. Articles 11 and 13 have caused particular controversy, with many heralding their adoption as the death of the internet. Article 11, also known as the "link tax", would require online platforms such as Google and Facebook to pay media companies to link to their content, while Article 13, the "upload filter", would force them to check all content uploaded to their sites and remove any copyrighted material. How this will affect regular internet users is still subject to debate, but it could seriously limit the variety of content available online -- and it could pretty much spell the end of memes.

Unsurprisingly, these parts of the bill have been met with opposition from digital rights groups, computer scientists, academics, platforms such as Wikipedia and even human rights groups. Supporters, however, say the consequences of the measures are being blown out of proportion, and that the provisions are merely intended to give creators and smaller outlets the opportunity to reclaim the value of their work. More details on Reuters.

Comments

Brexit

[cirby]

...suddenly doesn't look quite so bad, does it?

Re:Brexit

[markdavis]

>"...suddenly doesn't look quite so bad, does it?"

That is exactly what I was thinking.

>summary: "with many heralding their adoption as the death of the internet."

Well, no, but it might be the death of the "internet" in the EU. At some point they are going to go too far (this might be it) and companies will just give up and start blocking the EU and it will be like the great firewall of China, except in reverse. Then the EU can live in their own "digital utopia world" with as much censorship, manipulation, taxes, and control over information that they want.

Re:Brexit

[stealth_finger]

...suddenly doesn't look quite so bad, does it?

We get blue passports and memes, fucking hell yeah! Brexit is paying out big time :|

Re:Brexit

[alvinrod]

You might have more of a point if the UK weren't actively trying to clamp down on the internet in their own various ways.

Re:Brexit

[lucasnate1]

I don't fucking understand how copyrights now trump everything else

Because the west bases more and more of its economy on intellectual property while the production of physical property is moved to the third world.

Re:Brexit

[Anonymous Coward]

Translation... My fascist view of how the world should be doesn't hold up when debated openly. I am hoping we get censorship en mass so that my viewpoints are not questioned and debated. I am unable to win honest debates and am tired of it being pointed out that I resort to name calling and idiocy once I failed to make any intelligent arguments.

I think that just about sums up the left these days. Thanks for your worthless input and letting us know you are all for a dictatorship and free ideas and democracy should be banned. Please keep your views to the EU and keep on letting the UK know brekexit was a GREAT idea.

Re:Brexit

[lucasnate1]

How is this law going to censor the nuts you are talking about? The only effect of this law will be to prevent small companies from opening interactive sites, reducing the internet gradually into television. The nuts will still have their place, because they bring eyeballs.

Re:Brexit

[Mashiki]

Just read the law itself, it's the exact of what the summery states. The link's in that article and it also explains in small words that this is a link tax. It's an exact mirror of the existing German law that does the same thing.

It will still apply to UK

[aepervius]

Until Brexit all laws voted apply to UK. And if you think for a SECOND that the UK government will remove that particular one post-brexit, when they will be lobbied left and right to keep it by content holder, I have a bridge to sell you in London. Cheap.

Re:It will still apply to UK

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't a law yet. It is a Directive. Each member state must implement it via their own laws into their legal system. Most member states take their time in doing so with directives. I doubt the UK will be in a hurry passing such a law before BREXIT.

Pay to link?

[stealth_finger]

News sites will be rubbing their hands in glee at the prospect of being paid to be linked to, in reality what's going to happen is those links will stop when news aggregators etc decide fuck this. Then we'll be in for the crying that their business is going even further down the pan.

It will come down to who has more influence,

[dwywit]

The content owners, or the content indexers?

Content owners like large media companies are still desperately clinging to the past.

Google and other online gatekeepers hold sway over large percentages of the audience.

I eagerly await a final smackdown for Murdoch & friends, when the reality of distributed information finally hits home. Hits home to them of course, the rest of us already know.

Google and others have no obligation to list anything. If they decide that it costs too much to link items to media websites, well... tough. The other media companies will gladly waive costs if it means their content gets listed at the top of page 1 while Murdoch & co are relegated to page 2 or 3.

Re:This is what happens when young people don't vo

[alvinrod]

You assume that young people will do any better or that they have a "real" understanding of the internet. If you look at some of the groups of young people that are screaming the loudest, they'd seem to be the biggest censors of the internet with their demand for safe spaces and a ban on any expression that hurts their feelings. There are also a lot of young people that are going to throw in with the right-wing anti-immigration parties that are starting to spring up because they see that as more important than something going on with the internet. I don't know if those groups even have any opinion on this particular topic, but I don't think getting the younger voters involved will do anything.

In the U.S. the joke (from about two decades ago) about younger people voting was that it was the younger college voters in Minnesota that got Jesse Ventura elected. If you're not familiar with him, he's a bit of a conspiracy nut among other things. Probably an okay guy to be friends with, just not what I would consider governor material. I think the youth vote was also up in the 2016 election and we ended up with Trump, so I don't see it making a difference in this case either.