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

71–80 of 110 posts

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#71

Post by chimeracoder »

klmr wrote: post #66
chimeracoder wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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/fra…

> 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]).

Since 1978, it's been illegal in France to collect census information on race. This is done under the guise of providing "equality under the law". In practice, as pretty much any minority could predict, all it does is make it impossible to actually talk about the systemic discrimination which happens[0].

You say you lived in France for several years, and yet you're not aware that it's impossible to legally collect data on anything related to racial, ethnic, or religious minorities (including police brutality and incarceration rates). Which, in a way, is my exact point: making it impossible to talk about these issues in France doesn't mean that they don't happen; it just means that people who aren't affected by them aren't aware of them, and so they can continue believing the illusion that this racism somehow doesn't exist, or isn't as bad as it really is.

[0] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/how-french...

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#72

Post by clarry »

apocalypstyx wrote: post #67
scotty79 wrote: post #53

If 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 cou…

I think everyone ignores it because it's so far fetched (even if they go as far as assuming copyright == monetary compensation)

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#73

Post by kodablah »

Tomte wrote: post #64
kodablah wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> People aren't hurt by less data-selling

You're doing the intent thing where you are saying what you think is the case or the intent instead of the reality. People are hurt by the money they spend applying reasonable compliance risk avoidance measures when new laws come out. People running companies, employees of those companies, customers of those companies, and society as a whole. Maybe you feel the harm is worth it, but please stop pretending it doesn't exist.

And it didn't come out of nowhere, data protection laws had existed before, didn't work before, so they doubled down on the already-failed legislative approach with the same not-working institutions instead of taking more practical or incremental approaches.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#74

Post by Kliment »

mstade wrote: post #70
Y_Y wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Having called a few of them and spoken to them on the phone about this they are mostly pissed off about the cookie-cutter emails spamming them about this but quite happy to talk about it on the phone.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#75

Post by klez »

wott wrote: post #69
kmisiunas wrote: post #5

For 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.

You're not wrong. I remember seeing a couple of MPs lamenting the barrage of messages they received.

On the other hand, if you're an elected representative you better listen to your constituents. They are there to represent the people, not to decide in their place. Or, at least, that's the idea.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#76

Post by ddebernardy »

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.

Just ignore that part, which is procedure, and head straight to the meat of the directive.

The controversial article (13) in the EU directive is exactly three paragraphs long. Quoting the article's title and first paragraph in full:

> Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to large amounts of works and other subject-matter uploaded by their users

> 1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter.

As you can see, there might be room to argue that one could remove a word here or there, or perhaps to avoid a euphemism or two, but to me it seems like it's about as plain text as legalese can be.

As an aside, and in stark contrast with what a lot of the UK press would have you believe, EU texts tend to be very human readable; particularly when you compare it to texts produced by other legislative bodies.

To illustrate, compare the EU directive in question:

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...

To e.g. the US' CLOUD act:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4943...

Or e.g. the UK's Copyright, Designs and Patents act:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/pdfs/ukpga_19880...

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#77

Post by poooogles »

klmr wrote: post #36
pjc50 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.…

>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

There's nothing in UK law that prevents you from doing this. Bring along a cook book and store the knife securely (and keep it in your bag) and you're going to be fine. If you get stopped by the police mention it straightaway and move from there.

The legislation is written broad enough that discretion is possible in cases like this. Where it's going to look funny is when you're stopped with it in a pub at 9pm on a Saturday night.

So yeah I see both sides (I might go for a beer down the local after cooking on the way home with the knife for example), but really there's not much wrong with your knife laws IMO.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#78

Post by shkkmo »

rayiner wrote: post #68
snarf21 wrote: post #4

In 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 wha…

The european law requires services to have tools to not just validate content format, but process and categorize the content itself.

The australian 5 eyes memo says they think they can / should be able to require services to report all of this output directly to them.

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#79

Post by hhjinks »

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…

>The man was arrested for hate speech

And the hate speech he was convicted for was training his dog to do a "Bellamy salute".

Re: EU copyright reform: the facts

#80

Post by sctb »

binmanthrowaway wrote: post #62
kmisiunas wrote: post #5

For 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]

If you keep trying to start flamewars, or whatever this is, we'll ban the account.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN