With all due respect... these are not facts. Read Julia Reda https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/, not dumbass Mozilla copywriters.
EU copyright reform: the facts
61–70 of 110 posts
Re: EU copyright reform: the facts
#62For EU people who want to take action: call or email your Member European Parliament (MEP) and let them know that don't supper the policy (or support it?!?). You can call them via: https://act.openmedia.org/savethelink-call Or email by finding your MEP details on: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/search.html More info on taking action can br found here (scroll a little): https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/
[flagged]
Re: EU copyright reform: the facts
#63Earlier 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pure trolling: First off, the Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament and is expected to be repealed against (but it doesn’t hurt to be cautious, good on Mozilla).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…
"Article 13 in question was already rejected once by Parliament" -> Article 13 has not been rejected by the EP. What has been rejected is a proposal to fast-track the proposal with no debate. See https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/ "The Legal Affairs Committee narrowly approved the plans (with slight changes) – but in a surprise move, the Parliament then refused to rubber-stamp the Committee’s position, opening…
We’re saying the same thing. The Legal Affairs Committee isn’t the Parliament, it’s merely a committee. The EP only had two options here: either vote in favour of the article (“rubber-stamping”) or rejecting it. That’s what they did. The procedure in this case is to revise the proposal, which is exactly what’s happening here. This is working as intended. Of course the fact that the defeat was rather narrow is cause for concern, don’t get me wrong.
Re: EU copyright reform: the facts
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Please stop judging a law on what it's about but instead on its real life consequences. Intent matters little if people/companies are unnecessarily hurt.
People aren't hurt by less data-selling.
I love the GDPR. It came out of nowhere (I hadn't heard much about it before the big hubbub), I couldn't believe they were doing something so bold, and it reinvigorated my belief in the European Union.
Re: EU copyright reform: the facts
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
> GDPR “My oh my, we won't be able to sell people online life without them knowing it” > local movie quotas on services like Netflix Promoting local culture, what a shame. > arresting people who train their dog to do a bellamy salute Of course, if someone is training their dog to do a “Bellamy” salute when prompted by statements including “Heil Hitler” and “gas the Jews”, the chances that this guy is a closet neo-naz…
I meant having a guaranteed number of vacation days. And I don't care if the guy was a neo-nazi; it shouldn't be the government's job to decide what jokes are too offensive.
Strange how Anmericans always think it's bad that parts of Europe ban outright Nazi symbols and speech, when it was America that forced us to do so.
Americans even shut down newspapers after WW2 and only gave out licenses to start a newspaper after background checks and ideological checks.
Strange how things you made us do somehow morphed into something that you cannot accept at all.
Re: EU copyright reform: the facts
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
> All you have to do is go to France I’ve lived in France for several years. And yes, I agree that France unduly restricts individual freedoms (and protested against it). I’m not claiming that any single country is perfect. I’m claiming that they are, on balance, better than the US (when you’re poor and/or a minority). Basic personal safety is a prerequisite for freedom: If you can’t even be sure that you can afford…
> And yes, institutional racism also exists in France (and in every other European country) but it’s much less normalised than in the US. This is the line that white people in France often say, but it's completely wrong. Racism is much more institutionalized in France than it is in the US. Racism is so institutionalized in France that it's almost impossible to talk about it, because it's woven into the legal and soci…
> France has literally made it illegal to collect data on police brutality and incarceration rates of minorities in France
You’ll need to provide a good reference for that because this is completely wrong as far as I know (AI doesn’t mention it, for instance [1]).
Again, don’t get me wrong: I deeply disagree with the way police acts and is organised in France.
[1] https://www.amnesty.org/en/press-releases/2009/04/france-pol...
Re: EU copyright reform: the facts
#67If we all ignore all copyright it will go away and with it all the nighmares conceived to prop up its rotting corpse. But it won't happen sooner than before majority of creators learn that copyright does not benefit them in any way. We can teach them that by never paying for copyrighted things.
There is one apocalyptic scenario here that everyone ignores: it is monetary compensation that keeps the social norm. Remove that, make it so only the rich or the obsessed write, make music, etc, and they will increasing do so for their own ends, because there is no reason not to. Social alone approval will motivate very few to commit to the amount of work necessary for most creative endeavors.
On the surface, of course, this would seem ridiculous. But we only have to examine how much cultural capital is employed to keep writers writing toward the money and controlled by editors, and ratings boards, etc. And the common consumer expects what they, the consumer, to always be delivered unto with exactly that which they claim to desire. Under the monetary system reproductive advantage slates toward those who accrue capital. However remove that, and the 'shock value' of 'independent artistic work' becomes the most viable remaining path to mate attraction.
So, remove the money, and the only artists, writers, etc, who remain, are the ones that the mass of consumers despise as 'experimental' and 'weird', etc.
And given that humanity is pretty much by definition a story species, the resulting effects on society as a whole, with such a major hit to the mytho-poetic infrastructure that undergirds any society, might be very interesting. Most likely some government or wealth-backed cultural production engine will emerge in the vacuum, however, the question might be whether it will do so fast enough.
Re: EU copyright reform: the facts
#68In my mind, the most salient point is this one: FACT: The proposed new copyright rules will lead to direct surveillance of users’ activities online. This and the recent 5 eyes document to require backdoors for all technology and services are the same. The surveillance state is coming. It is being bought. You are being sold. But don't worry, they are doing this for our own security and safety. No one need watch the w…
How is that a "fact"? Pretty much every time you upload data to a website, there will be some sort of validation of the uploaded data that will happen. That's not "surveillance" it's a basic process that happens on the Internet. "Surveillance" requires going a step further to track what users are doing. (E.g. checking your ID at a club is not "surveillance"; having the bouncers file a report so someone can track what clubs each person goes to is surveillance.) Mozilla points to nothing in Article 13 to suggest such tracking would be required. They seem to be speculating that such tracking will happen. That may or may not be a good conjecture, but that doesn't make it a "fact."
Re: EU copyright reform: the facts
#69For EU people who want to take action: call or email your Member European Parliament (MEP) and let them know that don't supper the policy (or support it?!?). You can call them via: https://act.openmedia.org/savethelink-call Or email by finding your MEP details on: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/search.html More info on taking action can br found here (scroll a little): https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/
Oh yeah, last campaign of the kind worked great. Members of Parliament really appreciated to have their mailbox (and their voicemail) mail-bombed by hundreds or thousands of such spam and reacted super well.
No, in fact, no matter which side and party they belonged to, it really pissed them off and turned them against what the spam advocated for. Many thought it was orchestrated by some GAFAM.
Re: EU copyright reform: the facts
#70For EU people who want to take action: call or email your Member European Parliament (MEP) and let them know that don't supper the policy (or support it?!?). You can call them via: https://act.openmedia.org/savethelink-call Or email by finding your MEP details on: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/search.html More info on taking action can br found here (scroll a little): https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-reform/
You can use an automated (customisable) tool at saveyourinternet.eu to do this too.
Thank you, I've now used this to send an email to my representatives.