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

EU copyright reform: the facts

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 110 posts

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#31

Post by klmr »

no1youknowz wrote: post #13

From the viewpoint of regulations on business: - GDPR (Facebook/Google) - Article 11 (Reddit) - Article 13 (Github) - Mandated EU Content on streaming providers (Netflix) - EU Internet sales tax (Amazon) The simple question begs: how many more regulations aimed at US companies are coming? At this rate, the more regulations are created at fighting US companies. The number of internet startups and business located in t…

Art 13 isn’t a EU vs US thing. It‘s a digital vs analog thing (or, more precisely, old-style copyright holders vs young content creators).

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#32

Post by pjc50 »

kd5bjo wrote: post #29
pjc50 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can read the directive itself: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...

Yes, but with all the cross-references and legalese specifying which level of government is responsible for enforcing each piece of the directive, the actual regulations can be hard to extract for an untrained reader. Hence my request for an objective summary.

> which level of government is responsible for enforcing each piece of the directive

At least that's an easy question to answer: the member states.

A directive obliges member states to introduce local legislation to achieve a particular effect. Usually it's transcribed pretty closely, but some states may use their sovereignty to impose additional restrictions (if they're not precluded by the Directive, a different directive, or human rights law).

Generally if you want to speed up reading a Directive you can skip all the "Whereas" clauses, they're not binding but do specify the reasoning behind the directive.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#33

Post by timrichard »

skummetmaelk wrote: post #12
jimmaswell wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU and its member states have a penchant for crazy laws like this, GDPR, local movie quotas on services like Netflix, arresting people who train their dog to do a bellamy salute, arresting people for having potato peelers in public, and so on. I can't think of a single reason other than vacation days that I'd ever want to live there. I'm aware comparisons to 1984 are a cliche but the EU truly has been inching tow…

Come on now. You cannot compare this to GPDR. GPDR was about protecting individuals, this is about protecting corporate interests. That's why this seems batshit crazy and GPDR is reasonable. The rest of your points are worthless anecdotes. Yes it may have happened once, and yes it was stupid, but it's not like you will be chased down by the police if you walk around with a potato peeler. You cannot seriously believe…

> GPDR was about protecting individuals, this is about protecting corporate interests

Or how about both rooted in a power-grab by an aspiring superstate that has long been resentful of the influence the US and it's corporates has over it's Internet-dependent citizens?

Or perhaps I'm being too cynical. The remote, barely accountable, hard-lobbied politicians are only looking out for individuals. These new content filter and link tax proposals as just anomalies.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#34

Post by andyjohnson0 »

Anyone want to speculate on the chances of this getting approved by the European Parliament? Last July they blocked an earlier version and sent it back to the commission.

Edit:

And as someone living in the UK, I'm also wondering what the implications of this are for brexit[1]. Will the post-brexit interface between the EU and the UK w/r/t copyright be made even more complicated by this, with knock-on effects on digital service providers on each side?

[1] which I continue to oppose

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#35

Post by jimmaswell »

klmr wrote: post #19
jimmaswell wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU and its member states have a penchant for crazy laws like this, GDPR, local movie quotas on services like Netflix, arresting people who train their dog to do a bellamy salute, arresting people for having potato peelers in public, and so on. I can't think of a single reason other than vacation days that I'd ever want to live there. I'm aware comparisons to 1984 are a cliche but the EU truly has been inching tow…

That’s pure trolling: First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against (but it doesn’t hurt to be cautious, good on Mozilla). > GDPR While not uncontroversial, GDPR is generally seen as a good thing by experts. > arresting people who train their dog to do a bellamy salute This didn’t happen. The man was arrested for hate speech, not for gestures his…

You seem to have intentionally ignored "and its member states."

What am I supposed to take away from that quality of life ranking? Yes, the US is below a few EU countries and above others. And it's an average, which means it doesn't mean you can't have a better quality of life in the US than you would in Denmark depending on your individual situation. I for one would be much less happy having to deal with more than doubled gas prices and restricted individual freedoms.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#36

Post by klmr »

pjc50 wrote: post #30
klmr wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s pure trolling: First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against (but it doesn’t hurt to be cautious, good on Mozilla). > GDPR While not uncontroversial, GDPR is generally seen as a good thing by experts. > arresting people who train their dog to do a bellamy salute This didn’t happen. The man was arrested for hate speech, not for gestures his…

> the UK, which is generally pretty low on violent crimes, has a specific problem with knife crimes and is therefore tackling the problem heads-on. Sadly neither the problem nor the solution is new - the ban on knives in public dates to at least 1953. It's interesting (and very Brexity) that people blame these things on the EU when they're both very much British criminal law independent of the EU.

To clarify: I find the UK’s knife ban stupid, and it affects me personally (I often cook at friends’ places and, if these friends have no proper knives, I bring my chef’s knife; I also own two valuable antique swords but the rules for bringing them into the country are so complicated that they are indefintely stored at my parents’ place in another country). But like you said, it has nothing to do with EU legislation. And there’s a specific historical context which at least gives some explanation as to why the rule exists in the first place.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#37

Post by klmr »

raverbashing wrote: post #27
klmr wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s pure trolling: First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against (but it doesn’t hurt to be cautious, good on Mozilla). > GDPR While not uncontroversial, GDPR is generally seen as a good thing by experts. > arresting people who train their dog to do a bellamy salute This didn’t happen. The man was arrested for hate speech, not for gestures his…

> First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against (but it doesn’t hurt to be cautious, good on Mozilla). As they say, don't count your chickens before they're hatched

I’m not — I’m actually contacting my MEP.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#38

Post by klmr »

jimmaswell wrote: post #35
klmr wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s pure trolling: First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against (but it doesn’t hurt to be cautious, good on Mozilla). > GDPR While not uncontroversial, GDPR is generally seen as a good thing by experts. > arresting people who train their dog to do a bellamy salute This didn’t happen. The man was arrested for hate speech, not for gestures his…

You seem to have intentionally ignored "and its member states." What am I supposed to take away from that quality of life ranking? Yes, the US is below a few EU countries and above others. And it's an average, which means it doesn't mean you can't have a better quality of life in the US than you would in Denmark depending on your individual situation. I for one would be much less happy having to deal with more than d…

> You seem to have intentionally ignored "and its member states."

I didn’t, but your comment insinuates that it’s all the same. As for restricted individual freedoms, this betrays a lot about your background. EU contries value equal opportunity over individual freedom for a select few. For minorities and poor people, the EU fares a lot better on individual freedoms than the US does.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#39

Post by gcb0 »

the IP Juggernauts are pushing so hard and strong that they will be their demise, hopefully.

they are trying too hard to have their claws on every jurisdiction and be the international police that can prosecute everyone based on content piracy. And they are very close to that.

They already have control on north America and southeast Asia (via US, ChinaN and TPP agreements). Now they are "fixing" what they wanted im GDPR but lawmakers were too clever to see the tricks then, so they are being more explicit.

But eventually, what people will start doing is what we see in china. everyone in country A will do whatever it takes to consume content/interact with other people via sites in country B, which is not under the same jurisdiction of country A.

Hopefully people will still be able to live as they live today, and only yhe advertising market will suffer as brands now can't reliably reach one market or another. Maybe that fixes advertising too and force brands to sponsor services regardless of demographic. or maybe I am too optimistic and the IP conglomerates will win and people will not have access to any content that is not made and authorized by them.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#40

Post by kd5bjo »

pjc50 wrote: post #32
kd5bjo wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but with all the cross-references and legalese specifying which level of government is responsible for enforcing each piece of the directive, the actual regulations can be hard to extract for an untrained reader. Hence my request for an objective summary.

> which level of government is responsible for enforcing each piece of the directive At least that's an easy question to answer: the member states. A directive obliges member states to introduce local legislation to achieve a particular effect. Usually it's transcribed pretty closely, but some states may use their sovereignty to impose additional restrictions (if they're not precluded by the Directive, a different di…

And the real meaning of stuff like [1.11.3]? It's got to be there, or else the law is underspecified, but it doesn't make for effective lay communication. I still think a real summary would be useful for all the people that don't have your personal guidance about how to decode legislation.

[1.11.3] Articles 5 to 8 of Directive 2001/29/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU shall apply mutatis mutandis in respect of the rights referred to in paragraph 1.

Post reply on HN