Slashdot Mirror
The Man Behind the EU's Copyright Law is 'Surprised' By What's in the Proposal (qz.com)
Hours after the European Union Parliament voted to approve new controversial copyright laws that will transform how people in Europe and beyond use and profit from the internet, the man behind the legislation, Axel Voss, says he is unaware of what exactly he voted for. From a report: Emanuel Karlsten, a reporter for Sweden's Breakit news site, spoke with Voss, a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) and the EU's copyright rapporteur, after the vote. Karlsten asked about a last-minute amendment that will bar the filming of sports events. The MEP replied in a recorded conversation, "This was kind of mistake I think by the JURI committee. Someone amended this. No one had been aware of this." European Parliament press officer John Schranz at that point broke in to explain that he was aware of the provision in question, calling it "amendment 76." Schranz said that the amendment doesn't bar individuals from filming sporting events. Rather, "the main target" is online betting companies enticing viewers to their sites with video that they have no right to film. He objected to the fact that the "Greens and others" interpret the provision as having a much wider application.
But the MEP Voss admitted, "I didn't know that this was in the proposal so far, so of course I have to deal with it now. I do not consider that the commission and council will have this inside the proposal." Voss added that "because of the time pressure" and general focus on other, more notable aspects of the law, it's possible that the measure was insufficiently scrutinized.
But the MEP Voss admitted, "I didn't know that this was in the proposal so far, so of course I have to deal with it now. I do not consider that the commission and council will have this inside the proposal." Voss added that "because of the time pressure" and general focus on other, more notable aspects of the law, it's possible that the measure was insufficiently scrutinized.
So what he's actually saying is that it's fine to trade speed of a meeting for total destruction of the free Internet.
Thank you for once again showing the world what a pile of steaming bovine excrement the EU really is.
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
"I didn't know about Order 66 when I voted for it!"
I voted âremainâ(TM) in the Brexit referendum. I emailed MEPs about this proposal, and how harmful it could be. The only reply I received was from Farageâ(TM)s office: they said they would vote against. Nobody else apparently cared.
Perhaps I need to re-think my position.
just didn't speak.
I understand that some "politicians" are not very smart. It's not like there were open public discussions of the implications of law for months on many different web sites /s.
*vomit*
Yea you can claim all you want what its ment to do but reality is its what it can be interpreted to allow you to do. The way its written is the problem as depends on how you want to read it.
Don't forget stupid South Americans, stupid Africans, stupid Asians, stupid Australians, stupid fuckin Californians and asshole Wyomingans. Wyomingites. Whatever those fuckin stupid assholes from Wyoming are called.
"total destruction of the free Internet."
That's simply not true. Stop lying.
I don't respond to AC's.
This is basically the definition of incompetent. This guys votes on a law that he hasn't 'had time to read'. What a clown. There could have been anything in there. There should be constitutional limits on law making that include 'no unrelated riders', 'a minimum of X months between the last amended publicised change and the bill being voted on', 'all law must be made available to the public during the same consideration period', etc. It should also be a
This shit of secret laws on the books, last minute changes with all the 'unsavoury' bits added in at the last second, and lawmakers not even reading what they're voting on. It must go.
Is he fucking serious?
This is a world class governing body passing laws that affect people literally all over the globe... and their excuse was "we didn't have time to sufficiently scrutinize these before voting for them."?
This is... fucking insane to be light about it.
I tend to rant.
They probably would have voted for Brexit too if you his it in an amendment.
This is further proof that riders are a bad thing and should be constitutionally forbidden in the US and in the EU.
voted to approve new controversial copyright laws that will transform how people in Europe and beyond use and profit from the internet,
"and beyond" can safely be stricken from the article. How the European nations hobble their Internet access will likely not change how everyone outside the EU will use and profit from the Internet.
I know that here in the U.S. I won't and don't give even a rat's ass about "obeying" EU laws.
This space unintentionally left blank.
At least the King can know all his rights, like dropping the signature which means he is allowed to use an ink stamp instead of a pen on marriage certificates.
I wouldn't trust my opponents with wiping their own nose, ass, or hands.
That is a terrible way to run a society.
Seriously, if you don't have time to read something either:
a) Get out of the fucking job you're in and let someone more competent do it.
b) Don't vote for the fucking thing you don't have a clue about.
Why is this not obvious? There are *no* mitigating circumstances for voting for something you haven't fully read and understood.
Reminds me of another poorly-thought-out piece of legislation: "we have to pass the bill so you can see what's in it." And the PATRIOT Act before that, although that was more of a "please don't read the bill we just passed or you'll be outraged at the shit we just pulled on you."
I would like to propose in a 650,000 page long referendum, law, statute, whatever, that the EU pay me 5000lbs of platinum. Sorry that will take to long to read, just pass it.
At least one politician can admit they don't read or understand what laws they vote for.
Too much fog. Too much rain. Too little sunshine. Too many muslims. Too many foreign languages. Thank God the UK is no longer part of Europe.
Basically the people running things are professional busybodies and buttinskies.
They basically rubberstamp everything that comes through.
None of them actually read what they're pushing. They have aides do that and tell them yes/no. And all the aides are essentially "bought".
And the people actually making the decisions are unelected by the people and completely unaccoutable to ANYONE.
So these people are primarily there because they LIKE dicking around in other people's lives...oh and the big paycheck...
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
https://youtu.be/RbUGej05bLA
Give it a watch.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Won't be long before google is building gas chambers for the new Europe, after it tests them first in China.
We don't need no stinking First Amendment! The people and their vote will keep those in power from slowly twisting censorship to their benefit!
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Whenever there was some piece of legislation I didn't like but I knew was going to pass I would just tack on insane crap like banning cellphones, requiring french people to be ejected from restaurants etc.
He's not an idiot, of course he knows what the consequences are. He's being PAID for this shit
People who have a lot of power, people who own newspapers, politicians who rely on those people and other people at that level, are quite concerned about the Internet. The Internet is designed to facilitate the free flow of information. That means "curated" information, packaged with approved, "correct" messages (designed to make people more pliant and easier to govern) is harder to project onto the masses.
Expect this sort of thing to continue. "Mistakes" that continuously occur in favor of the "curators" of correct thought are not mistakes. This is a constant, continuous push, and will never end until the Internet is fully curated as well.
To have pages stuffed into legislation minutes before a deadline to pass it.
In civilized countries like Australia, UK, legislation is first "tabled" then often goes to committee for review, and finally debated an voted on. There is a process.
The EU, however, appears to be crazy. We saw that with the software copyright saga.