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.
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.
"total destruction of the free Internet."
That's simply not true. Stop lying.
I don't respond to AC's.
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.
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.
One way to fix the problem is to make it a policy that all bills have to be read out loud in the assembly before they are voted on. It would not only remove the excuse that they didn't know what was in the bill but it may also make the bills significantly less wordy. 8^)
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.
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!!!
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.
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.