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

EU Countries Back Copyright Reforms Aimed at Google, Facebook

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 183 posts

Re: EU Countries Back Copyright Reforms Aimed at Google, Facebook

#61

Post by ben_w »

r_smart wrote: post #47
flexie wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't frame this as a free speech issue. Freedom of speech is as protected in the EU as it is in the US, possibly more. Freedom of speech in Europe is not just an EU question, but also - and mainly - up to constitutions and legislation of the member states. So of course it varies. But there is less surveillance in Europe on what citizens say online, European media is less centralized than American, there are more par…

|Don't frame this as a free speech issue. Freedom of speech is as protected in the EU as it is in the US, possibly more. Short of making a call to violence, I will never hear from an authority about anything I say or post online. The same can't be said for much of Europe. In fact, didn't the EU courts just rule that criticism of Mohamed should be banned?

> In fact, didn't the EU courts just rule that criticism of Mohamed should be banned?

No.

https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2018/10/26/q-have-e...

Re: EU Countries Back Copyright Reforms Aimed at Google, Facebook

#62

Post by mancerayder »

mancerayder wrote: post #52
porpoisely wrote: post #16

This is what I despise about "news". If this was china or russia or venezuela, etc, the headline would be "China tightens grip on their people" or "International community concerned as China becomes more authoritarian" or "Pro freedom activists protest against China's draconian censorship". It would be spun as something more ominous than "reform". But reuters being reuters and also a major supporter of censorship, of…

But reuters being reuters and also a major supporter of censorship, of course spins it in a pro-censorship manner. That's too bold of a claim to just toss in there leisurely. Surely you should feel some degree of need to qualify that statement. "Supporter of censorship"? How does this become the top comment?

The Reuters article presented both points of view, including the dissenters, contradicting the "Reuters supports censorship". But perhaps if we upvote and downvote commenters, we can make a real change in the world.

Re: EU Countries Back Copyright Reforms Aimed at Google, Facebook

#63

Post by wbxrs »

ben_w wrote: post #61
r_smart wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

|Don't frame this as a free speech issue. Freedom of speech is as protected in the EU as it is in the US, possibly more. Short of making a call to violence, I will never hear from an authority about anything I say or post online. The same can't be said for much of Europe. In fact, didn't the EU courts just rule that criticism of Mohamed should be banned?

> In fact, didn't the EU courts just rule that criticism of Mohamed should be banned? No. https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2018/10/26/q-have-e...

The truth of the matter is that this woman said Mohammed was a paedophile for fucking a 9 year old (which is even correct according to the Quran). She was convicted in Austria for blasphemy. The EU said the conviction was correct.

This should be terrifying to anybody who supports free speech. The ECHR is supposed to be a human rights court but they are allowing member states to convict people for blasphemy.

Re: EU Countries Back Copyright Reforms Aimed at Google, Facebook

#64

Post by oytis »

dmortin wrote: post #60
wbxrs wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Maybe this will revitalize hosting of personal websites where there’s no “platform” to censor your free speech? In Germany, Austria and Switzerland you are required to disclose your full name, address, telephone number and more if you publish a personal website. This makes it impossible to keep a personal and anonymous website. That is why having platforms is important.

What if you host your German language site targeting readers in Germany outside of Germany? Is it against the law? There are plenty of hosting choices around the world. I don't see why anyone would host a site in Germany with this condition.

I've dug into that topic a bit. The summary is if you're a German resident OR you're making a website aimed at German residents, you might be successfully sued. Where is it hosted, or whether it is in German at all doesn't matter much.

There is of course always an option to use anonymous hosting and make it hard to identify you from the website content. Then people whose business is to sue other people on the internet will probably leave you alone. But that also destroys the social value of your page.

Re: EU Countries Back Copyright Reforms Aimed at Google, Facebook

#65

Post by isostatic »

hannasanarion wrote: post #20
xorand wrote: post #9

Create. Produce original content. Keep the copyright. Don't consume canned content.

Fair use exists. This law makes it illegal to use clips of a movie in critiquing it, or cut snippets of images to form a collage, or point to examples of art, film, and music in an educational setting. Copyright was never intended to be pervasive and absolute. Copyright is supposed to protect the commercial potential of the original work by keeping people from making copies that supplant the market for the original,…

> This law makes it illegal to use clips of a movie in critiquing it, or cut snippets of images to form a collage, or point to examples of art, film, and music in an educational setting.

Really? It specifically says it shall in no way affect legitimate uses

Which specific part are you referring to which prevents this?

Re: EU Countries Back Copyright Reforms Aimed at Google, Facebook

#66

Post by xorand »

"‘online content sharing service provider’ means a provider of an information society service whose main or one of the main purposes is to store and give the public access to a large amount of copyright protected works or other protected subject-matter uploaded by its users which it organises and promotes for profit-making purposes. Providers of services such as not-for profit online encyclopedias, not-for profit educational and scientific repositories, open source software developing and sharing platforms, electronic communication service providers as defined in Directive 2018/1972 establishing the European Communications Code, online marketplaces and business-to business cloud services and cloud services which allow users to upload content for their own use shall not be considered online content sharing service providers within the meaning of this Directive." https://juliareda.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Art_13_unoff...

Re: EU Countries Back Copyright Reforms Aimed at Google, Facebook

#67

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

judge2020 wrote: post #28
porpoisely wrote: post #16

This is what I despise about "news". If this was china or russia or venezuela, etc, the headline would be "China tightens grip on their people" or "International community concerned as China becomes more authoritarian" or "Pro freedom activists protest against China's draconian censorship". It would be spun as something more ominous than "reform". But reuters being reuters and also a major supporter of censorship, of…

Take this with a grain of salt since it's their own website, but Youtube themselves say they wouldn't be able to let any content on their platform stay up even if it slightly resembled copyrighted content. Think the current Content ID system times 10. https://www.youtube.com/saveyourinternet/ https://youtube-creators.googleblog.com/2018/10/a-final-upda...

Content ID almost definitely operates on a score model, which I'm sure would scare Google into changing their minimum required score to remove a video. It would result in more false positives, but you can almost see the headline in your head if they don't "Youtube has over 50000 videos that their own Content ID Algorithm detected, but they didn't take them down!"

Re: EU Countries Back Copyright Reforms Aimed at Google, Facebook

#68

Post by xorand »

hannasanarion wrote: post #20
xorand wrote: post #9

Create. Produce original content. Keep the copyright. Don't consume canned content.

Fair use exists. This law makes it illegal to use clips of a movie in critiquing it, or cut snippets of images to form a collage, or point to examples of art, film, and music in an educational setting. Copyright was never intended to be pervasive and absolute. Copyright is supposed to protect the commercial potential of the original work by keeping people from making copies that supplant the market for the original,…

"Providers of services such as not-for profit online encyclopedias, not-for profit educational and scientific repositories, open source software developing and sharing platforms, electronic communication service providers as defined in Directive 2018/1972 establishing the European Communications Code, online marketplaces and business-to business cloud services and cloud services which allow users to upload content for their own use shall not be considered online content sharing service providers within the meaning of this Directive." https://juliareda.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Art_13_unoff...

Re: EU Countries Back Copyright Reforms Aimed at Google, Facebook

#69

Post by strictnein »

flexie wrote: post #29
beezischillin wrote: post #3

This is sad and disgusting, our speech is being limited completely unfairly and without our consent and we're being told that it's a good thing. The fact that they're trying to package it as some sort of well-deserved revenge against silicon valley big tech is just tasteless. The EU's big gripe against these companies is their tax situation, if they really wanted to change that then they'd be looking into a unified a…

Don't frame this as a free speech issue. Freedom of speech is as protected in the EU as it is in the US, possibly more. Freedom of speech in Europe is not just an EU question, but also - and mainly - up to constitutions and legislation of the member states. So of course it varies. But there is less surveillance in Europe on what citizens say online, European media is less centralized than American, there are more par…

Nothing you've posted is accurate or true.

Like, literally nothing.

There won't be "10 different versions" of these filters on Github for free. How do you even imagine that will work? There will need to be a constantly updated and massive database of signatures for all copyrighted materials. That's not something that can be done for free and you can guarantee it will have a significant price tag attached

Free speech in the EU is not as protected as in the US. Full stop.

There is no surveillance of what citizens say online in the US. People in the EU are arrested for mean tweets.

There are many uses of copyrighted material that are covered under free use in the US. You can, for instance, critique a movie while using segments of that movie.

Journalists aren't not getting paid because Google has a small blurb underneath a link to their article. Google is driving traffic to their articles.

Europe should tax Amazon? Huh?

Re: EU Countries Back Copyright Reforms Aimed at Google, Facebook

#70

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

flexie wrote: post #57
wbxrs wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Don't frame this as a free speech issue. Freedom of speech is as protected in the EU as it is in the US, possibly more. Yeah, no. This (blasphemy laws) would be unthinkable in the US: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/its-not-fr...

Again, Europe is many different legal systems, and blasphemy laws are not everywhere. I don't like that limitation to freedom of speech anymore than you, but all countries, including the US have limitations such as libel, slander, pornography, obscenity, etc.

>Freedom of speech is as protected in the EU as it is in the US, possibly more.

The EU is a legal entity. Europe is the continent/area. The EU does not protect freedom of speech more than the U.S.

Post reply on HN