Slashdot Mirror


The EU Can Still Be Saved From Its Internet-Wrecking Copyright Plan (vice.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: While the European Union voted this week to pass its widely-criticized new Copyright Directive, activists and members of European Parliament say there's still a chance of keeping the EU from fully implementing the worst parts of the troubling proposal. The most controversial aspects of the plan remain twofold: Article 11, which would require EU News outlets to pay a "link tax" just to share anything more than "insubstantial" snippets of published content, and Article 13, which would require that EU member countries implement the kind of automated copyright filters that have been a chaotic mess here in the States. Other problematic measures were passed as well, including Article 12a, which prohibits sports fans from posting their own photos or videos of sporting events online, while stating that only event "organizers" have the right to do so.

That said, all hope is not lost. While some variant of Article 11 and Article 13 is likely be approved next spring, public pressure could force inclusion of additional safeguards for end users, Member of the European Parliament Julia Reda told me in an email. "While the overall bill was adopted with a comfortable majority, the outcome was more narrow for the two controversial articles (366:297 and 393:279)," Reda said. "Since the final vote will be close to the next European elections, that leaves open a small chance that massive public protest against these provisions may still convince MEPs to kill the entire bill." If passed, individual EU countries will be able to interpret the Directive as they see fit, though Reda believes they will likely steer toward stricter interpretation.
"The real hope for repeal in my opinion is in the courts," author and activist Cory Doctorow said. "There's simply no way this passes EU Constitutional muster -- it's generalized filtering and mass surveillance by another name. The fact that they claim to be looking for 'infringement' doesn't change that."

Longtime Slashdot reader Lauren Weinstein adds: [...] These articles now enter a period of negotiation with EU member states, and then are subject to final votes next year, probably in the spring. So now's the time for the rest of the world to show Europe some special "tough love" -- to help them understand what their Internet island universe will look like if these terrible articles are ever actually implemented.
UPDATE: The Electronic Frontier Foundation issued a report slamming the proposal, offering a number of ways people can fight back.

87 comments

  1. Why not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why don't we just remove all EU links and TLDs and just forget them like they want so badly?

    1. Re: Why not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Teabag all EU citizens daily

  2. BUT FREE HEALTHCAREEEE!!1111 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That pretty much absolves the EU of everything. Nothing to see here; go back to sleep while government daddy handles stuff. Thanks.

  3. IDP them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is time for the internet death penalty for Europe. Cut them off from the rest of the world. There's your damn filter.

  4. TRUMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is what THIS is About! Europeons don't like the man who is ringing their clocks. Pay up, or get out.

  5. Ask for X, settle for Y by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a shakedown.

  6. does it apply to links to non-EU news outlets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know much about this law so maybe someone has a better idea here, but can't Google just link to American news sites and drop the European ones altogether?

    Or is there something about the law that would apply even in that case?

    1. Re:does it apply to links to non-EU news outlets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That is a solution even i as a citizen of an EU member country would suggest to do. Too bad for me and the people living in EU, but that is the only way to show the idiocy of this BS.

      In principle and in justice they could not apply it to links of media outside of EU at a service outside of EU, but in practise they might think they have the right to do so. I don't know if they are that stupid though.

    2. Re:does it apply to links to non-EU news outlets? by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      I don't know much about this law

      And neither does anybody else here, apparently.

      There's two main clauses:

      1) Google can't put a little snippet of text in links to news sites.

      Solution: Stop linking to them. The news sites will be back in a couple of weeks, screaming for a repeal of this law. Google will be able to charge them money for reinstatement

      2) Facebook has to check uploaded images to see if they're copyrighted

      This isn't even a problem for anybody except Facebook, so, who cares.

      --
      No sig today...
  7. Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let it all go through. Just let them wreck their own internet, I want to see it. I want to see every popular website out there shut down in the EU because it's no longer worth the money, watch the useless bureaucrats squirm as potentially the entire economy of the EU tanks and takes the rest of the world into a recession.

    Why? Because I'm tired of living in a world where tiny minded little interests can impose their influence on governments that would ruin the world, including their own, just because they believe they can make an extra penny. This stupid shit is everywhere, in every country, all the time. And if sensible people keep trying to "make the best of it" they greedy idiots will just continue shoving their stupid shit down everyone's throats to the detriment of all.

    So let it fail. Let something fail for once, to show just how useless and corrupt this system of placing narrow minded beliefs over reality is. Let something big fail in front of everyone for all to see, so maybe the system is replaced before the failure becomes the entire planet, becomes billions dead because a few coal mining CEOs needed that second yacht. Let the idiots shoot themselves before they take everyone else with them.

    1. Re:Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm tired of living in a world where tiny minded little interests can impose their influence on governments that would ruin the world, including their own, just because they believe they can make an extra penny.

      But this is the only reason governments exist anymore. Corporations have surpassed governments in terms of raw power, but using the existing government structure as the conduit for this power is less disruptive and avoids social unrest by preserving the illusion of democracy.

    2. Re:Let it all go through by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 3, Funny

      I agree. When foreign corporations and content owners give the EU a giant middle finger, they will be on the hook to try and suppress the content. Good luck with that. They'll end up looking as bad or worse than China. There's also the uncomfortable fact most content worth fuck-all is in the USA (FYI, we invented the fucking Internet, World). So, if the EU decided to build a giant firewall, they'd basically just be firewalling off a bunch of content leeches. I don't remember the last time I found a useful fact on a server with a EU based TLD. The shows on Netflix produced in the EU all suck dog balls. Of course they want to tax the stuff made in the USA. That's where the good shit is at that people actually want. It's going to be interesting to watch them cut off their nose to spite their face.

    3. Re:Let it all go through by lucasnate1 · · Score: 1

      Things fell before because of tiny minded little interests, but even when had two world wars, in the end, people forgot.

    4. Re:Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the ellision of democracy

    5. Re:Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As a European I really hope as many sites as possible will block us. The more Brussels negatively affects the lives of average people the more whose will realize what a shitshow it has become. Let that ivory tower of corruption and ignorance burn!

    6. Re:Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Things fell before because of tiny minded little interests, but even when had two world wars, in the end, people forgot.

      It's not that people forget, it's that the people who remember are replaced by a new generation of ignorant kids who don't care or are too stupid to take history seriously. It really is just lazyness when you get right down to it, basically for a short lived species like ourselves, it'd probably pay dividends to put every generation into a mock war where they are actually harmed to some extent to sear into their tiny brains that war is no laughing matter.

    7. Re:Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. When foreign corporations and content owners give the EU a giant middle finger, they will be on the hook to try and suppress the content. Good luck with that. They'll end up looking as bad or worse than China. There's also the uncomfortable fact most content worth fuck-all is in the USA (FYI, we invented the fucking Internet, World). So, if the EU decided to build a giant firewall, they'd basically just be firewalling off a bunch of content leeches. I don't remember the last time I found a useful fact on a server with a EU based TLD. The shows on Netflix produced in the EU all suck dog balls. Of course they want to tax the stuff made in the USA. That's where the good shit is at that people actually want. It's going to be interesting to watch them cut off their nose to spite their face.

      You misunderstand. This is designed to allow the EU even more reason to take American corporations to court and extract billions of dollars in fines.

    8. Re:Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty sure packet switching is a concept thought up by multiple people over the world.

      "We invented the internet" is an americanism.

    9. Re:Let it all go through by Highdude702 · · Score: 0

      So, lets put on our tin foil hats for a minute... I know I know.. Trust me this shit is gonna be funny.. :tinfoil hat
      So What if, The editors Beauhd(the HD has no relation to Highdude, trust me im me not him i swear) and msmash....
      Are actually creating these accounts like the 'BeauHD (5) ( 5406192 )' and msnash(surpeised they havent come out with msgash lulz) and the such.
      and theyre using those accounts to troll and maybe even voice their own extreme opinions... :end
      I mean crazy people done know their crazy, and i know im crazy therefor im not crazy.. right?
      Right?>!

    10. Re:Let it all go through by Shikaku · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand. Companies would most likely refuse to do business with the EU and that would be the end of the EU economy and even the EU, because you can't sue for refusing to do business by location.

    11. Re:Let it all go through by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 0

      I don't think he didn't understand. I think he implied exactly that.

      Having said that: I agree. EU would be cutting itself off from too much of the world economy, which would refuse to do business with them.

      I sure as hell wouldn't.

      Further prompting Brexit, by the way, which has been unconscionably delayed.

    12. Re: Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Americans invented TCP/IP, UDP, BGP, DNS, Telnet, and Ethernet, among other key elements. Yes, CERN invented the web and web browsers, but nobody but the US built the core behind the Internet itself: Arpanet, the NREN, etc. Claiming that it was a multinational invention is globalist fiction.

    13. Re:Let it all go through by mentil · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Remember the Great Recession from 10 years ago? It'd turn out the same way: the little people collapse, and the big players responsible walk away scot-free with huge bailouts while spreading propaganda that things unrelated to them were at fault.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    14. Re: Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is "watch the world burn for the lulz" somehow a Comcast employee or KGB agent? More like 4chan to me

    15. Re:Let it all go through by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I want to see every popular website out there shut down in the EU because it's no longer worth the money

      And suddenly the Internet becomes a better place.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    16. Re: Let it all go through by wiretrip · · Score: 1

      Initial concepts of wide area networking originated in several computer science laboratories in the United States, United Kingdom, and France. Donald Davies first demonstrated packet switching in 1967 at the National Physics Laboratory (NPL) in the UK. Cerf credits Hubert Zimmermann and Louis Pouzin, both French, with the fundamentals for TCP/IP. The first stored program computer was built in in Manchester, UK and the first *computer* by Babbagein the UK. So there :-)

    17. Re:Let it all go through by MoreDruid · · Score: 1

      The worst part is that this practice has been proven to fail in Spain, Germany, Belgium and France. Big corporations have a proven record on just bailing the entire market instead of complying. https://news.slashdot.org/stor... https://yro.slashdot.org/story... https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... So yeah, apparently that news hasn't reached Brussels yet.

      --
      The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.
    18. Re:Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This already happens due to the fact that not everyone in every country wants to comply with the GDPR. For an example go to the Australian Tenplay website and it tells you you're geoblocked.

    19. Re:Let it all go through by stealth_finger · · Score: 3, Funny

      So let it fail. Let something fail for once, to show just how useless and corrupt this system of placing narrow minded beliefs over reality is. Let something big fail in front of everyone for all to see, so maybe the system is replaced before the failure becomes the entire planet, becomes billions dead because a few coal mining CEOs needed that second yacht. Let the idiots shoot themselves before they take everyone else with them.

      Funny, that's what we thought about Trump but let's see how that one ends.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    20. Re: Let it all go through by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Claiming that it was a multinational invention is globalist fiction.

      As is the claim it's american property.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    21. Re: Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet the internet was developed in the US and the web really came into its own in the US, while Europeans only had minitel. So there. :)

    22. Re: Let it all go through by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 1

      Yep. It's like China threatening tariffs. Go for it, assholes. When your trade surplus is 3x, you can't fucking win that way. Same with content. You might think twice about threatening to tax content when the content makers might decide you are just fucking irrelevant and keep the content for themselves and other like minded folks who aren't being greedy dickheads.

    23. Re:Let it all go through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where was the EU outcry when entire websites went 451 in the wake of the "protection from data" act? Right, there wasn't any outcry. Europeans are happy in their xenophobic filter bubble.

  8. The EU Wants Copyright For Its WWW Wrecking-Plan? by OpenSourceAllTheWay · · Score: 1

    Copyright granted! Now nobody can steal or plagiarize the EU's Plan For Wrecking The Internet (EU-PWTI). If we were to also DRM protect the EU-PWTI... bla bla bla bla...

  9. Punctuality action by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just implement the directives in the strictest way possible, to the point that Google/YouTube/everything becomes unusable, before it becomes obligatory, and put a banner there "this service will remain as it is now if EU does not back off". Keep it like that all the time, except for one day a week or so (to make sure people do not forget what they are missing),

    1. Re:Punctuality action by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I was thinking along those lines too. "Malicious compliance". Make sure this law is followed VERY closely.

  10. thumbs up! by ooloorie · · Score: 1

    activists and members of European Parliament say there's still a chance of keeping the EU from fully implementing the worst parts of the troubling proposal

    Why stop when the EU is having so much fun?

  11. Internet-wrecking? by mi · · Score: 1, Interesting

    the European Union voted this week to pass its widely-criticized new Copyright Directive

    How exactly will the reduction of plagiarism wreck the Internet? Will the DNS-servers stop working? Will connection latencies increase? What?..

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Internet-wrecking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      reduction of plagiarism wreck the Internet?

      The internet is a network for copying data between computers. If you restrict that, you break the whole thing.

    2. Re:Internet-wrecking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For most people (ie not us), the "internet" is the shit they do with it, not the network that pushes the bits around that lets them do the things that they do. If Facebook stops working, "the internet" is down.

    3. Re:Internet-wrecking? by astank · · Score: 2

      While stopping plagiarism isn't necessarily a bad thing in the short term, the more restrictions are placed on the content the more the people 'at the bottom' miss out, and the more out of reach the really valuable content is. To me it looks like the internet is becoming the complete opposite of what it was meant for - a network to facilitate the spread of information. Given how much we now rely on the internet for the proliferation of information, rules like this turn the internet into more of an impeder for information. At least the quality information that is up-to-date (obviously copyright applies to more than just Netflix shows and sports highlights). I agree with you though, it won't necessarily *break* the internet. But I wonder at what point governments realise that already undereducated masses are being left further behind? Then reversing the damage with legislation that butts heads with the larger corporations may not even be possible.

    4. Re:Internet-wrecking? by mi · · Score: 1

      stopping plagiarism isn't necessarily a bad thing in the short term

      What?! You are merely allowing for it to possibly be a neutral thing — but only in a short term? In a long term, according to you, it is inevitably a bad thing. Wow... Especially for someone, who pretends to worry about "people 'at the bottom'", who'll "miss out"... Just who are these people, and what is it they'll miss, if plagiarism stops tomorrow? I know people — some of whom you'd no doubt consider 'at the bottom' — who'd love for the plagiarism to end. The cartoonists, the photographers, the musicians, the creators of YouTube videos — folks creating the original content (a.k.a. "OC"), whose work is currently mercilessly plagiarized by the wannabies. That's who will benefit from any reduction in plagiarism — both short term and for the foreseeable future.

      Now, back to you — who are these "already uneducated masses", who will be "left further behind" by it?

      a network to facilitate the spread of information

      Plagiarism is not the information worth spreading. Not before the Internet, not over the Internet. No way, no how.

      I agree with you though, it won't necessarily *break* the internet

      It will most certainly not wreck it. My point stands — the choice of metaphor is entirely overblown, inflammatory, and out of place.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    5. Re:Internet-wrecking? by mi · · Score: 0

      The internet is a network for copying data between computers. If you restrict that, you break the whole thing.

      So, the "whole thing" is already broken — wrecked — by the ban on child pornography?

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    6. Re: Internet-wrecking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a grade A idiot.
      What this law would do is make it illegal to link to any copyright material. So for example it would be illegal for Google to provide a link to bbc.co.uk, or any articles they publish.

    7. Re:Internet-wrecking? by astank · · Score: 1

      Plagiarism is definitely not worth spreading, however it's a mistake to call all derived works, works that reference others (e.g. for criticism and review) and even copied works "plagiarism" - apologies, you used the term but I was referring to derived/copied works that still give credit to the original author, I should have been clear about that. I'm not saying that people who produce content should have their works immediately copied and shared, that's what I meant when I indicated that copyrighting these works for limited amount of time is a good thing. And definitely provides incentive for content creators. What I am saying is that this limit should not be forever, or even a 'long' time. The reality is that a lot of content/material is not even owned by by the original author, but rather by a publishing company, record company, etc. Yes the author is still likely to get paid for their work, but proportionally the profit earned from the work is much less in the favour of the author. The uneducated masses are the people that cannot afford or do not have access to higher levels of education. With the current trend these people will be less equiped to be able to consume and evaluate quality sources of information, if they will even be able to afford it. It feels as though average people's consumption of information will gradually be more and more limited. Before we used to more heavily rely on public libraries. While it's true that most people could not afford having all of the books or even most of them, they were allowed access and under fair use were even permitted to make copies of books, journals, etc. available there. These content filters have so far offered very little in the way of protecting that fair use as far as the internet is concerned. The internet may not be completely wrecked, but IMO will be damaged as a result.

    8. Re:Internet-wrecking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With such a definition "the internet being down" would look like a great thing to me! :)

    9. Re: Internet-wrecking? by mi · · Score: 1

      Changing the goal-posts, huh? After the highly-moderated claim, that a mere restriction of copying data "breaks the whole thing", was demonstrated to be a grade-A idiocy, the argument has changed...

      it would be illegal for Google to provide a link to bbc.co.uk

      This idiocy does not even merit a grade...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    10. Re:Internet-wrecking? by mi · · Score: 1

      this limit should not be forever, or even a 'long' time.

      I disagree rather strongly on this one, but that's a different topic.

      With the current trend these people will be less equiped to be able to consume and evaluate quality sources of information

      Why?! Suppose, the discussed bill is actually successful in reducing the amount of "derivations", how would that reduce the unfortunate's access to the original content — informational and entertaining alike? Yes, it may become harder for us all — yearning to be educated and entertained, whatever our station and creed — to find the "derivations", but easier to find the originals. And for the original author(s) to be both properly recognized and compensated.

      allowed access and under fair use were even permitted to make copies of books, journals, etc. available there.

      There is no threat to "fair use" of anything published online. As you could make a copy of the book you legally found in the library, you can print out an article — or a picture — you find online, as well as copy-paste it into an e-mail to a friend, etc.

      There may be some threat to unfair use, but that's a good thing...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    11. Re: Internet-wrecking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you a media industry shill, hunh?

    12. Re: Internet-wrecking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Definitely a media industry shill. Tell me, shill, aren't you worried you won't get a paycheck anymore now that your masters have won the war and have no use for the likes of you anymore?

    13. Re:Internet-wrecking? by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      Plagiarism is not the information worth spreading. Not before the Internet, not over the Internet. No way, no how.

      That's a pretty blanket statement.

      It wasn't good that more than one author could write Robin Hood stories?

      It wasn't good that multiple musicians could play and modify folk tunes?

    14. Re: Internet-wrecking? by mi · · Score: 1

      Ok, from shifting the goal posts, to personal attack, to ad hominem. A truly classical sequence. Stay anonymous, coward...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    15. Re:Internet-wrecking? by mi · · Score: 1

      It wasn't good that more than one author could write Robin Hood stories?

      I don't believe, the legislation being discussed threatens the fanfic genre...

      It wasn't good that multiple musicians could play and modify folk tunes?

      It certainly was not good, that the original composer was not compensated. History — and the literature — is full of heart-rending stories of starving artists. People enjoyed their tunes, but — short of winning support of a rich sponsor — there was no way for them to earn a living off of their talent. Modern times — and the concept of Intellectual Property — finally gave these people such means. That's an improvement over the past, a big improvement...

      But the greater point of my posting is, whether you want Intellectual Property rights to be stronger or weaker, any changes in that regard will most certainly not "wreck the Internet".

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    16. Re: Internet-wrecking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seeing that 90% of people use google. Yes it would break the whole thing for the EU.

      Also, if this passes, what's next? It won't end. But keeping drinking the kool aid and trolling. We just laugh at you and mod you down. Fuck off teoll.

    17. Re:Internet-wrecking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can fix it by a ban on private property.

    18. Re: Internet-wrecking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The new EU regulations effectively ban fanfiction.

  12. Stop Brexit, and Stop this outrageous law ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Copyright law is a law for the rich. IT is not made to help the little guy as the lobbyists behind this law have persuaded some gullible people.

    The people making sure that Mickey Mouse won't EVER come out of copyright are NOT fighting for us !

  13. Seems corporate interests by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are busy fucking the EU politicians up the arsehole. Maastrict treaty coming home to bite? I mean thats what happens when you remove all power form parliament.

  14. As far as I can tell. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's pretty much just millennials that don't understand the principles involved (including not being around or at least cognizant when the web was created therefore nullifying any 'expertise' they may avail themselves of) and have zero regard for the efforts of others for which this is eliciting fear and butthurt. You can still license things, and believe it or not, a lot of the time, presuming one isn't dealing with a megacorporation, when you ask people for permission . . . they grant it. From what I can tell, the said butthurt are too just too lazy to go through the trouble of making the effort. The web isn't going to 'die'.

    1. Re:As far as I can tell. . . by hjf · · Score: 3, Informative

      LOL. This guy is disconnected from reality. Dude: Netflix outside the US SUCKS. The catalog is less than half the size. That's because YOU CAN'T LICENSE SHIT. It doesn't work like that. you don't just go and get a license for anything you want. If it was that easy, euronetflix would be as good as netflix. But it's not.

  15. Unlimited links by guruevi · · Score: 1

    All you have to do is create a page that continues creating random links. Then when it comes time to quantify the tax, you will get the bill near heat death of the Universe.

    You owe us EUR 2,147,483,647 - I suggest you upgrade your system to contain 64 bit numbers. Okay, you now owe us EUR 9,223,372,036,854,775,807 - I'd suggest you go for a 2048 bit number.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    1. Re:Unlimited links by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean Google? Frankly any search engine in the last 15 years has been pretty much random links with little to do with what was searched.

  16. Only technology can save the EU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Technology that makes censorship impossible is what is needed. We need an internet that can route around the service provider. The tyrants never sleep.

  17. Source? by ISayWeOnlyToBePolite · · Score: 2

    Could someone please post the actual text of the controversial paragraphs before we discuss this any further?

    1. Re: Source? by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      YOU could do that...

      Afaik Google is not currently censoring links to EU legislation.

    2. Re:Source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wikipedia has an acceptable coverage, although I find it biased:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_on_Copyright_in_the_Digital_Single_Market

      They also link the PDF to the actual voted text in the external links, I copy it here:

      http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35373/st09134-en18.pdf

      BTW the text itself is reasonably clear but full understanding, as usual with state laws, requires knowledge of a series of legal principles and knowledge of at least a dozen previous directives and laws referenced in the text.

      What is rarely publicised is that the text provides large exemptions, most non profit, educational and scientific research activity is exempt for example.

  18. Outsourced Filtering by mentil · · Score: 2

    Article 13 would be a pain, but it'll most likely not wreck the Internet. What'll probably happen is that some company starts offering filtering services for uploaded data. User uploads video/photo/whatever to your site, you then hash that data (with say MD5+SHA256, chance of collision for both is nearly nil). Hash is sent off to 3rd party filtering site, they return back 'Prohibited' or 'Allowed'. They charge your business per unit or per month, costs you a negligible portion of your revenue and you don't have to R&D a solution for yourself. It's considered 'good enough' for compliance with the law, and there's a central place people can go to to challenge misclassified data, which is an improvement over having to go to hundreds of different sites that banned your data.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:Outsourced Filtering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That would be incredibly compute expensive. Just to cover the costs of user uploaded content checking the ads would have to increase substantially. EU sites would look like 1999 popup spam ad-impression miners. Plus virtually any site that has users uploaded content would be trivial to bankrupt. Simply upload content, any content. White noise even.

      A new type of DDoS would be born out of copyright hashes.

    2. Re:Outsourced Filtering by yuriklastalov · · Score: 1

      Great, more middlemen. Just what the internet needs!

    3. Re:Outsourced Filtering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And for copyrighted text? Do you just send the whole text in case there's a poem or an unauthorized copy of someone else's comment in there?

      Every video/photo/whatever is automatically copyrighted already, how does this 3rd party (with an incredible continent/internet wide monopoly status) know if the user is the owner of it or otherwise licensed to distribute it?

    4. Re:Outsourced Filtering by mentil · · Score: 1

      Uploaded content is normally hashed for deduplication purposes. Also, there are ASICs dedicated to hashing data (e.g. cryptocurrency miners). So it'd be cheap/free. The only real problem would be old sites hashing a backlog of old content using the algos required, but they could presumably do it over time if noone yet noticed any of it was infringing.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    5. Re:Outsourced Filtering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until someone changes a pixel...

    6. Re:Outsourced Filtering by wiretrip · · Score: 1

      "vwith say MD5+SHA256" - no, this would not cover anything with even minute changes to the file (you wouldn't need both hashes btw). You would need to use a CTPH (Context triggered piecewise hashing) or fuzzy model, like SSDeep or photoDNA. Computationally expensive... And that's before you even look at text...

  19. Spread out we can't win, together we can by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a hopeless fight at the EU level just as it is a hopeless fight at the US level. The reality is the only way we can begin to solve these problems is by like-minded individuals coming together in one region. Otherwise we do not have the numbers in any one place to influence politicians or elect politicians who care about liberty and freedom. The Free State Project has been the only successful demonstration of what can be achieved by migrating to a specific region for political change. The problem is most of you would prefer or think you prefer to remain a slave to the state all the while getting upset about shit like this. Do you want to win or do you just want to bitch? If you want to win you got to actually do something more than sitting on your ass and signing an online petition.

  20. Most the EU economy is not based on web site by aepervius · · Score: 1

    In fact if you look at most of the EU economy, the web site are highly local, otherwise the rest of the economy are local service and exports... So your crash and burn would not happen.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re: Most the EU economy is not based on web site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot to sign your post,

      - a hopeful naive EU citizen

  21. obligatory by astrofurter · · Score: 1

    In Soviet Europe, the news reports you!

  22. OMG! The EFF published a report!!!! OMG!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OH MY GOD!!!! I can't believe the effectiveness of the EFF. They've PUBLISHED A REPORT!!!

    HOLY SHIT.. I can't believe it.. I am speechless. The EU has absolutely no choice now. They must back down. OR ELSE the EFF might taunt them a second time!

    1. Re: OMG! The EFF published a report!!!! OMG!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be careful if I were in the EFF. They have lost the war at this point and they have no way to reverse the situation. In a few years all of the EU's pirate parties will have disbanded and the new status quo accepted. It's over. Time to get over it. If they try to make a futile stand, the EU might brand them as an "extremist" organization and have its members investigated and arrested.

    2. Re: OMG! The EFF published a report!!!! OMG!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ha- good luck with that. Some of us are in the US and we maintain our weapons. There are more weapons in the US than people. And some of us aren't afraid to threaten the EU. I have already advocated the overthrow of the EU.

    3. Re: OMG! The EFF published a report!!!! OMG!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While it's clear that in a shooting war with the US the EU would have to surrender without conditions immediately, we first need the US to get into a shooting war with the EU, without the latter weaseling its way out of it.

  23. Blocked to the EU Campaign? by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

    Maybe the EFF needs to create a blocked to the EU campaign? This campaign would be hosted by any website for a day or more and illustrate that it may be safer for many sites to simply geoblock the EU, than to try complying. If the message isn’t made in a way people notice, then few people will be making the noise they should.

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    1. Re: Blocked to the EU Campaign? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the EFF membership needs to grow up and understand their cause is lost without hope and they have to move on. Their defeat is absolute. The EU is *not* going to backtrack on th

  24. ECJ won't save anyone by megalomaniacs4u · · Score: 1

    Doctorow will be disappointed the ECJ primarily a political court, when the court thinks it is in the best interest of the EU they'll ignore certain parts of EU law to preserve the political purity of the EU.

    So if the EC bigwigs get behind this stupidity, then the courts are much more likely to side with them even if the law is stupid.

  25. EU twitch meme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LUL Are teeth aren't straight LUL we smell like poo LUL we've been overrun by apes LUL you guessed it, we are EU LUL

    1. Re: EU twitch meme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our