Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
EU is trying to pass as a law the obligation that any social network site where people post LINKS to content has to pay for the links to content providers, even if the content is academic and even if the content itself is freely available !!!
A copyright activist, EU parlamentarian, Julia Reda wrote on her facebook page today:
“A loss for culture and research in today’s copyright votes
The Committee for Culture and Education (CULT) and the Committee for Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) certainly didn’t prioritize culture, education or research in today’s copyright votes.
Both votes were in favour of the extra copyright for news publishers creating charges for the use of snippets and links. Incredibly, the ITRE committee - responsible for research and usually a staunch defender of open access - even voted to extend the extra copyright to academic publications, which would make open access publishing virtually impossible. It would stop people from linking to academic content, despite the content itself being free. This would apply to both online publications and print journals. The chilling effects on the spread of academic works and information would be substantial.
When it comes to the provision on forcing online platforms to use content filters, both committees followed the European Commission’s proposal, including and underlining the liability of the online platform hosting providers. The obligation would be harmful to freedom of expression as machines can’t tell if content is protected free speech or an infringement, and would take down legal content. This filtering demand could also break EU startups. SoundCloud’s senior policy manager has said that they would not exist today if this content filtering demand had been in place when they were a startup. This proposal would not only lead to economical disadvantages for the EU and kill innovation, it is also in violation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which forbids the indiscriminate monitoring of all users’ uploads.”
Thanks for the information, but are you suggesting we at the nLab need to take action?
It sounds like this was a Committee vote for a policy recommendation, and not legislation itself. If you know of any petition where people could raise their objections to such a recommendation, please pass it along. My gut feeling is that any such proposal would be vigorously contested (and absurdly hard to enforce if somehow made law), but then again I am not a lawyer (IANAL).
Right, it is not yet a legislation but a committee vote.
Electronic Frontier Foundation: Stalemate Continues in Negotiations Over European Copyright Filters has a large explanation as well as showing how these proposed new rules contradict other policy.
… two worrisome proposals being pushed by publisher and music industry lobby groups for inclusion in a new Digital Single Market Directive: a requirement for mandatory upload filtering by user content platforms (Article 13), and a link tax payable by news aggregators in favor of publishers (Article 11).
I don’t think these rules are likely to be accepted. If you are concerned the EFF link discusses activist efforts against them.
1 to 4 of 4