Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 407 posts

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#51

Post by r3bl »

merinowool wrote: post #36
Silhouette wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So yes, there is still plenty of room and time to discuss this rather unfortunate policy. But not that much time. The main European Parliament vote is due in July. For those of you in the EU, now is probably a good time to be writing to your MEPs.

If this law has already been paid for, what you would get from your MEP is a template response in the spirit of "I share your concerns blah blah, but copyrights are important blah blah". I don't think you can do much about it at this point.

You should really look up how EU regulations work.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#52

Post by TuringTest »

"Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate."

They may as well request providers to deploy magical leprechauns riding on rainbow unicorns, because such "effective" technologies don't exist. Case in point: Google's copyright detection.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#53

Post by merinowool »

izacus wrote: post #2

This bill pretty much demands that YouTube Content ID like systems are introduced across the web. With the wording, it's better for the site to delete more content on false positives than risk false negatives. All in the name of mighty copyright. Side effects of these false/negative averse copyright takedown systems can be easily seen on YouTube: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17338700

That means if you have a website a third party would have control over everything that is being uploaded to it.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#54

Post by blibble »

josteink wrote: post #10

This is what happens when those in control don't understand, know or care about the things they regulate. So I guess this is bad. --goes and reads article-- > Article 11, requiring online platforms to pay publishers a fee if they link to their news content, was also approved. What the fucking FUCK? Pay to send companies actual traffic? Pay to be allowed to use the basic building-block of the world wide web on the wor…

> Just how is it possible to be so out of touch with how things work, and still be allowed to pass regulation?

why do you think they're out of touch? they know exactly what they're doing: what they've been told to by the media companies

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/eu-affairs/2...

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#55

Post by merinowool »

VMG wrote: post #25

I'm excited about this. This will boost VPN, Tor and other technologies that protect users from inane regulations. https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/cryp...

It is very easy to block VPN, Tor and other technologies. These can be in fact criminalised the same way drugs are. Possession of a VPN on your device could give you a criminal record.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#56

Post by sampo »

hesk wrote: post #34
josteink wrote: post #10

This is what happens when those in control don't understand, know or care about the things they regulate. So I guess this is bad. --goes and reads article-- > Article 11, requiring online platforms to pay publishers a fee if they link to their news content, was also approved. What the fucking FUCK? Pay to send companies actual traffic? Pay to be allowed to use the basic building-block of the world wide web on the wor…

The law was basically made at the publisher’s behest to get Google to pay them. So far, it has spectularly backfired. In Germany, Google started to delist news sites from their index. After traffic dropped, the publishers gave Google a license to link freely. Law defeated. In Spain, they went a bit further and wrote into the law that Google had to list news sites in their index. So Google News shut down in Spain. Law…

So Google gets licenses to link to new sites for free, but smaller companies and private people's website cannot link to news sites?

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#57

Post by sebst »

orwin wrote: post #44
sebst wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope you're right on this. Decentralization is what the internet was actually build for. Centralization, on the other side, brought the web to less technical people and thus scaled so massively. Can technical literacy which certainly increased (in some ways) lead to a new era of decentralization or will that be the fatal end of a symbolic "Eternal September"?

I was kinda skeptic about federation at first (mastodon, GNU.social etc), but i've installed and tested a nextcloud platform for one of my client and i've been really impressed so far. It's clunky, a bit bloated (for me, TUI > GUI for 90% of apps, so take it with a grain of salt) and have an average documentation (a pretty good documentation for a free software /s). But despite that, once installed successfully, it i…

A long way to go: Have a professional install nextcloud for you vs. sign up at dropbox.

And that's basically just for hoarding private files.

The network effect makes it even worse: Why should I use XYZ if all my friends are on Facebook/WhatsApp/WhatsOEver?

Decentralized infrastructure (as in email, usenet, irc, ...) needs to have a bigger popularity than every walled garden. Then, the internet will become "a better place" rather than "there is a better niche for hacker kind of people on the net"

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#58

Post by merinowool »

r3bl wrote: post #51
merinowool wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this law has already been paid for, what you would get from your MEP is a template response in the spirit of "I share your concerns blah blah, but copyrights are important blah blah". I don't think you can do much about it at this point.

You should really look up how EU regulations work.

Enlighten me please, as I don't believe the reasons for passing it are genuine.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#59

Post by ernesth »

Uberphallus wrote: post #50
ernesth wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. According to the so called link-tax article, it is not linking but putting content that makes a platform liable. So this HN post would not be illegal because of the link, but maybe because of the title that was "stolen" from the publisher. The aim is at news.google.com and other search engines and news aggregators that include a blurb coming from the article along the link. To be honest, it is not yet clear if th…

But without a sample of the content, the title, links are useless, see my sibling comment.

If the content you use is written by you rather than the linked site, you are not concerned by this article. So paraphrasing the article or using an automatic summarization should keep you clear.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#60

Post by ahel »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #38
ernesth wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. According to the so called link-tax article, it is not linking but putting content that makes a platform liable. So this HN post would not be illegal because of the link, but maybe because of the title that was "stolen" from the publisher. The aim is at news.google.com and other search engines and news aggregators that include a blurb coming from the article along the link. To be honest, it is not yet clear if th…

> it is not linking but putting content that makes a platform liable All the comments quoting content would be taxable, though.

> All the comments quoting content would be taxable, though.

Like this one.

Post reply on HN