Article 13 is almost finished and will change the internet as we know it • Hacker News Board

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

#391

Post by jakeogh » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 7:51 PM UTC

GuB-42 wrote: post #235

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…

Yep, it is. The directive applies to Hacker News. And it will certainly be in trouble people decided to use it to post an entire Harry Potter novel and it becomes the go-to place to read it. But Hacker News has moderators, and in practice, these posts are aren't likely to stay long, therefore fulfilling Article 13 obligations. I'm pretty sure that movie quotes are not copyright-protected. And the last point in the ar…

Is HN a EU entity? Sure they could decide to abide, but legally, the EU has no jursdiction over other countries. It's going to (continue to) break up anyway so this is all rather moot.

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

#392

Post by ABCLAW » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 7:52 PM UTC

kd5bjo wrote: post #362

ABCLAW wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...So what? Comment content is governable in the site ToS, where copyright assignment or other methods of defining the respective user/site rights can be dealt with. Even if it wasn't, your performance in posting implies consent to provide at the very least a limited license to publish content you posted. So where's the beef here?

Only that, the comments section alone on HN is pretty straightforwardly “organis(ing) and promot(ing) [...] copyright-protected works uploaded by (its) users”, and so whether or not it falls under the scope of this section (1) hinges only on the regulators’ and courts’ opinions of what a “large amount” is. (1) In a hypothetical world where this law has unbounded jurisdiction

Even if we take this doomsday hypo at face value (HN promotes comments? Really?), so what?

What's the scary remedy for a copyright holder if they already provided a license to publish the published content?

User posts don't make every forum into pornhub. Calm down.

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

#393

Post by jakeogh » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 7:53 PM UTC

hyperman1 wrote: post #374

vorticalbox wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you prove that it came from a movie? You can not copyright words else no one would be able to say anything. That's what trademarks are for.

easy from the perspective of this law: build a db of every line spoken in every movie. Then block all posts containing a line from this db. If this blocks too much, dang provides human appeal. UPDATE: To be clear, I am very much against this law. The collateral damage will be immense. But the politicians who want this law, they simply dont care.

...Which is a shockingly bad idea. Europe is crushing itself under it's own administratove state.

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

#394

Post by Fargren » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 7:58 PM UTC

rdlecler1 wrote: post #340

vedantroy wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always viewed it as a transaction--go to the news site and read the news, in exchange they will sell data on what articles you're reading, etc. I was fine with that transaction. In fact, I would rather have them sell my data instead of charging money. Consumers have a choice on whether or not they want to go to these sites, it's not like they are forced to give away their personal information to news sites. I would…

Agree. There are ways to protect your data if that’s important to you. If I walk out in the middle of a freeway I should expect that I might be hit by a car rather — the EU instead says, “let’s ban freeways”.

No, EU says "let's put signs that point to where there are (previously invisible) freeways".* GDPR does not ban any practices, it just says that certain practices need to be communicated to and approved by the people affected by them.

*metaphors can get quite silly

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

#395

Post by jakeogh » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 8:01 PM UTC

nicoburns wrote: post #377

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.

GDPR has a very worthy purpose though: companies were taking far too many liberties with people's personal data. I don't see analogous problems with copyrighted material (there is some infringement, but it doesn't really seem problematic to society).

That's not what it's for. The GDPR legslates what events one can remember (using incrementalisim). It's ultimately an attack on general purpose computing.

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

#396

Post by erik_seaberg » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 8:03 PM UTC

dasil003 wrote: post #378

erik_seaberg wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just the costs, it's attaching a 20M EUR risk to activity that may not even be worth 20M of revenue.

No, the risk is created by abusing customer data. If the cost was less than revenue then it’d be a toothless law.

GDPR is the size of a novel and attorneys can't even agree yet on what counts as PII. It's nowhere near a crisp law that only prohibits bad things you'd know not to do.

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

#397

Post by BurritoAlPastor » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 8:03 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #351

Aengeuad wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be insane to implement privacy and data regulations differently for smaller companies. You would end up with startups having free reign to abuse peoples privacy in order to gain market dominance against their larger competitors who don't have this advantage, and you'd have larger companies near the threshold arguing about and doing everything in their power to stay under their threshold so they can avoid doi…

No it wouldn't. Large companies can pay for a lot of things that small companies can't. What is insane is putting in regulation in areas like this instead of just punishing people for mis-conduct.

You can’t punish companies for misconduct if you don’t have laws against that misconduct.

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

#398

Post by sokoloff » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 8:03 PM UTC

pavpanchekha wrote: post #360

sokoloff wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would movie quotes not be copyright-protected? They are almost certainly copyright protected, with copyright law provisions granted for certain fair use purposes.

Keep in mind that "fair use" is an American doctrine, not built into international copyright treaties and often defined administratively (not legislatively) in other countries. And we are discussing copyright law in Europe. Europe uses several itemized exceptions to copyright; a movie quote could fall under 5.3i "incidental inclusion" or 5.3k "pastiche", or in some contexts 5.3d "criticism and review", but there's no…

That outcome sounds a lot like the outcome of US system.

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

#399

Post by azangru » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 8:07 PM UTC

austincheney wrote: post #29

azangru wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or English as the officially recognised global language ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Why not Mandarin?

- Because Mandarin is the official language only of China (and Taiwan)?

- Because English already has a great momentum (with the number of speakers of English as a second language, pop culture and the Internet)?

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

#400

Post by DyslexicAtheist » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 8:09 PM UTC

tallanvor wrote: post #265

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've so far only noticed the blocking on (tabloid) US news sites which when visited with a VPN are full of trackers and overflowing with ads. It didn't feel like a loss to me but would be curious to know if there are services which people feel they really needed/wanted but now can't access w/out VPN?

The Chicago Tribune is not a tabloid, and it blocks EU visitors now, nor are many TV stations that now block people from outside the US. Even a VPN doesn't always solve the problem, unfortunately. It's also very annoying that Google News still shows links from those sites even though you can't actually visit them.

I was actually searching for this very example but incorrectly remembered it as LA Times (but it was the Chicago Tribune). Not sure if this is a loss to people in the EU if the CT would go dark for them. Maybe annoying to expats but not sure if anyone here would cry over them. This might have in fact been the reason why they didn't bother with compliance in the first place (no subscribers/reader from EU)?