You are not logged in.

#1 2018-09-12 18:31:02

twoion
ほやほや
Registered: 2015-08-10
Posts: 2,485

EU passes internet-catastrophic amendments to copyright directives

Fellow EU residents will be able to enjoy link tax and upload filters for their own protection to the fullest, from now on and in perpetuity.

Let's say all thank you to the EU parliament members for representing their electorate so skillfully (as if they had to undergo election), as well as the EU commission for seeing vested business interests through to their full implementation in law.


A silent kite against the blue, blue sky

Offline

#2 2018-09-12 21:38:39

DeepDayze
Member
From: In Linux Land
Registered: 2017-05-28
Posts: 735

Re: EU passes internet-catastrophic amendments to copyright directives

Oh that is rough and I am sure similar rules may be in the offing for the USA too.


Real Men Use Linux

Offline

#3 2018-09-13 06:16:16

ohnonot
...again
Registered: 2015-09-29
Posts: 3,917
Website

Re: EU passes internet-catastrophic amendments to copyright directives

hmm.
i read both articles - ok, i gave up on theverge when it became too speculative.

i have been aware of copyright laws before the www became a thing.
it has always cut both ways - helps artists big and small, but also hinders business big and small.
e.g., if a pub owner wants to play music in his pub, they need to pay money to GEMA first (or restrict themselves to content that is free from that).
i always marveled at how youtube gets around that.

so, about this new law - i see how it is problematic for facebook, youtube, google etc.
and i don't give a rat's ass.

i don't see how it can be relevant to anyone who's running their own blog, providing they stick to common sense.

that leaves medium-sized websites and "platforms", maybe like this forum?
what is the impact on someone running a small forum? maybe the "what are you listening to" thread?

i'm trying to understand what the term "link tax" is supposed to mean. i think it's a deliberately too broad, simplified and even slightly false buzzword.
surely people aren't going to be taxed for clicking links, and websites providing links aren't going to be taxed per click?
even after reading the articles and understanding what this law is about, i don't understand how someone could come up with this phrase.
"upload filter" makes more sense to me, and i just don't understand how they can be refering to the same thing.

Offline

#4 2018-09-13 07:45:43

twoion
ほやほや
Registered: 2015-08-10
Posts: 2,485

Re: EU passes internet-catastrophic amendments to copyright directives

i'm trying to understand what the term "link tax" is supposed to mean. i think it's a deliberately too broad, simplified and even slightly false buzzword.
surely people aren't going to be taxed for clicking links, and websites providing links aren't going to be taxed per click?
even after reading the articles and understanding what this law is about, i don't understand how someone could come up with this phrase.

The 'link tax' refers to what in Germany is called the 'Leistungsschutzrecht' (literally: right to the protection of one's effort) which pertains to the dissemination and aggregation of quotes (text snippets) on news aggregators like Google News, but also all search engines, blogs, and forums. For example if you run a forum, quote a passage from an online newspaper and show 1 ad on the page to finance, you have to pay a share of the revenue to the publisher whose news or article you just quoted. The ad is just an example. I'm unsure if donations do also relate to this.

If you think this is largely unenforcable, that's because it is, however this hits all prominent search engines and news aggregators as they are easy targets for litigation in this respect. On top of that, in Germany 64%+ of all such revenues would have to be paid to a single publishing consortium, the Axel Springer Publishing House. Which is why this is a success for lobbyism.

Basically, together with the mandatory upload filter (do we need to disable avatars here?), if you don't do anything as a small forum to combat copyright infringement (thereby incurring high costs or service fees), you can basically be shut down at any point in time when a lawyer or competitor decides to pay attention to you.

This makes small-time forum admins like us permanently low-key 'cyber' criminals.

What I can immediately think of is that services like e.g. scrot.moe are now absolutely not attractive to run out of EU countries.

Last edited by twoion (2018-09-13 07:47:39)


A silent kite against the blue, blue sky

Offline

#5 2018-09-13 08:15:09

Sun For Miles
Member
Registered: 2017-04-12
Posts: 140

Re: EU passes internet-catastrophic amendments to copyright directives

My uneducated guess is that they are fighting the biggest IT corporations that are operating worldwide, with favoring their own monopolies. I'm guessing that Jaron Lanier is sort of happy about this.


Señor Chang, why do you teach Spanish?

Offline

#6 2018-09-14 06:01:18

ohnonot
...again
Registered: 2015-09-29
Posts: 3,917
Website

Re: EU passes internet-catastrophic amendments to copyright directives

twoion wrote:

The 'link tax' refers to what in Germany is called the 'Leistungsschutzrecht' (literally: right to the protection of one's effort) which pertains to the dissemination and aggregation of quotes (text snippets) on news aggregators like Google News, but also all search engines, blogs, and forums. For example if you run a forum, quote a passage from an online newspaper and show 1 ad on the page to finance, you have to pay a share of the revenue to the publisher whose news or article you just quoted.

so it's about quotes, really.
not links (although they very often come together, i do understand that).
imo, it depends on the extent of the quote.
current (not web related) legislation would confirm that for most countries.
i hope they aren't stupid enough to tax actual links, because from those the link target can only benefit, no? assuming they want the attention.
btw, we've been in a similar place already sometime in the 90s when musicians started "sampling" music from elsewhere. a very long and very heated debate followed after some legislation wanted to make it illegal.
but in the end "it depends" - mostly on how long the snippet is.
people still do it, and are not criminals for it.

now i have not read the whole text of the new law, but i'm pretty sure it comes down to something like that in the end.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB