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

Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it

juliareda.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 450 posts

Re: Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it

#301

Post by stef25 »

r3bl wrote: post #219
yostrovs wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not clear what's going on with GDPR, good test cases are only now starting to be tested. But the fact that many American newspapers, for example, are blocked in Europe is certainly something to worry about.

> But the fact that many American newspapers, for example, are blocked in Europe is certainly something to worry about. There's just one large company that decided to block EU visitors: Tribune Publishing[0]. Yes, them blocking Europe is bad. Them owning so many local newspapers that this decision even makes an impact is a bigger problem. I'm not saying that they're the only ones blocking Europe, but I am saying that…

LA Times was blocked before but now loads fine in EU. The other two are still blocked.

Re: Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it

#302

Post by toyg »

buboard wrote: post #245
DanBC wrote: post #61

A friendly reminder that almost no-one commenting in this thread has read the full articles and recitals.

TBH it's not clear what it entails. Plus i m not sure which one is the latest directive. More importantly i have never, ever heard of any local IT unions or societies being involved in the process of legislating these laws (same thing for GDPR). I don't believe this law will change things radically in europe, although i m a little worried with all this predatory lawmaking against US companies. The main issue remains…

> IT unions

I think I'd have a bigger chance of meeting a unicorn than a member of a "IT union".

Re: Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it

#303

Post by kodablah »

blattimwind wrote: post #273
mvanga wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"internet platforms", "organize", "promote", "large amounts", "uploaded by their users", "in order to make a profit". These phrases by themselves are open to interpretation in various ways. In particular, what I find dangerous is that these appear to be specific enough to convince people to believe there will be little to no room for abuse, and yet are vague enough to allow a motivated political actor to target someo…

Indeterminate legal concepts are very common, I don't know why this is always brought up as soon as it's "about the internet".

Because it's often applied across borders, and in cases of late, potentially by independent bodies of different countries. IME, it's often brought up on any large set of laws, especially those governing freedom of information, and why most people discourage large encompassing new laws over meager ones or none at all.

The real question is why people take the it's-very-common approach to belittle people's concerns.

Re: Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it

#304

Post by sonnyblarney »

GuB-42 wrote: post #160

It looks surprisingly reasonable. "internet platforms that organise and promote large amounts of copyright-protected works uploaded by their users in order to make a profit" That's actually a lot of limitation. From my understanding: "organise and promote" means it is not simple hosting, and "in order to make a profit" excludes organizations like Wikimedia Commons and "large amounts" most likely excludes smaller webs…

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I can see most of the obvious impetus for this, but don't feel it's going to work out very well at all.

I'm not sure what a smarter version of the legislation would look like.

Maybe it works out, but there is some downside risk here which involves a brand new 'lawyer economy'.

Re: Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it

#305

Post by ric2b »

LoSboccacc wrote: post #296
drewbuschhorn wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like we had this exact same argument over GDPR, but no horror stories have descended about Mom and Pop operations run out of business but the evil Brusselcrats.

> no horror stories law need to be tested trough time, because it will be used by the next party in power for hundreds years, whether you like the party in power or not. the only reasonable way to reason about law is full on pessimism. it's like we already forgot the tyranny that was going on less than a century ago and was acquired through escalating legal abuse.

Does the EU parliament even have parties?

Re: Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it

#306

Post by LoSboccacc »

mvanga wrote: post #199
GuB-42 wrote: post #160

It looks surprisingly reasonable. "internet platforms that organise and promote large amounts of copyright-protected works uploaded by their users in order to make a profit" That's actually a lot of limitation. From my understanding: "organise and promote" means it is not simple hosting, and "in order to make a profit" excludes organizations like Wikimedia Commons and "large amounts" most likely excludes smaller webs…

"internet platforms", "organize", "promote", "large amounts", "uploaded by their users", "in order to make a profit". These phrases by themselves are open to interpretation in various ways. In particular, what I find dangerous is that these appear to be specific enough to convince people to believe there will be little to no room for abuse, and yet are vague enough to allow a motivated political actor to target someo…

> DMCA: there will be no abuse

https://www.theverge.com/2015/6/18/8803571/sunday-times-inte...

> GDPR: there will be no abuse

https://euobserver.com/justice/143343

> Art. 13; there will be no abuse

yeah, let's be optimistic!

Re: Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it

#307

Post by kodablah »

ThomPete wrote: post #190
porlune wrote: post #140

This seems like it will benefit the whales more than the fish, as they can absorb copyright infringement costs into their already expansive legal departments, whereas a smaller company will likely go belly up or be chummed.

This is exactly the ongoing problem with the EU they don't distinguish between large corporations and small businesses which really illustrate how clueless the EU is when it comes to the market and the businesses that are governed.

> This is exactly the ongoing problem with the EU they don't distinguish between large corporations and small businesses

Personally, I don't think laws should discriminate like this, and if a law is not good for business overall, it should be shuttered, not targeted. There are exceptions of course, but I don't think there should be on the internet (or information in general).

Re: Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it

#308

Post by toyg »

c3o wrote: post #269
Y_Y wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PILATE: Hoo hoo hoo ho. The little wascal has spiwit. CENTURION: Has what, sir? PILATE: Spiwit. CENTURION: Yes. He did, sir. PILATE: No, no. Spiwit, siw. Um, bwavado. A touch of dewwing-do. CENTURION: Oh. Ahh, about eleven, sir. PILATE: So, you dare to waid us. BRIAN: To what, sir? PILATE: Stwike him, Centuwion, vewy woughly! slap

This would indeed seem to be a copyright infringement in many EU member states. For example, in Germany it wouldn't fall under the quotation exception (no such thing as vague "fair use" here), since you aren't critically engaging with or commenting on the quote, which would be allowed – you just reproduced it. The movie studio could now hold HN liable. Well, except that HN is not under EU jurisdiction, so it could pr…

> you aren't critically engaging with or commenting on the quote

He's using the quote to make an unrelated point. This wouldn't be considered copyright infringement anywhere you have an impartial judiciary.

Re: Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it

#309

Post by kodablah »

dmortin wrote: post #240
porlune wrote: post #140

This seems like it will benefit the whales more than the fish, as they can absorb copyright infringement costs into their already expansive legal departments, whereas a smaller company will likely go belly up or be chummed.

Just like adblockers. You can advocate using them, but they only help the big players, because Facebook and such can ask for subscriptions if needed and they can also afford implementing anti adblock measures. While small sites with a handful of staff, can't do that. People may subscribe for big sites like Facebook and Youtube , but they won't subscribe separately for a lots of small sites. So blocking ads helps elim…

> You can advocate using them, but they only help the big players

Not true, they also help the end users, who often get lost in these discussions of big-vs-small companies. Turns out these "whales" everyone is so anxious to target provide benefits to end users, who are often the ones that end up bearing the brunt of the pain.

Re: Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it

#310

Post by jtbayly »

m-i-l wrote: post #241
hyperman1 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For your info: Hacker news is: - an Internet platform - that organizes and promotes large amounts of posts - which are copyright-protected works uploaded by their users - in order to make a profit as it is an advertisement for y combinator. So hacker news needs a filter lest you quote a sentence from some movie. What is 'meant' is irrelevant. Important is the letter of the law. Besides, 'meant' is a very dangerous wo…

Most film quotes on HN would be covered by "fair use"[0]. If someone pasted an entire script in a comment that would be something different entirely, and likely to be picked up by the existing flagging or moderation system. Also, I'm not entirely sure how HN itself can be said to be profit-making, e.g. there are no subscription fees to use it and it doesn't appear to have any advertisements from any advertising platf…

Companies pay to get their job listings in front of the HN eyeballs. This is advertising.
Post reply on HN