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

Four Wikipedias to ‘Black Out’ over EU Copyright Directive

wikimediafoundation.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 204 posts

Re: Four Wikipedias to ‘Black Out’ over EU Copyright Directive

#61

Post by austincheney »

cf498 wrote: post #41
austincheney wrote: post #16

tldr; Subcommunities have the flexibility to take independent action regarding policy position. No so interesting. I was hoping to get a deeper dive into why they disagree with the upcoming law.

Why they disagree with censorship? Its a great firewall with the enforcement being pushed to every last person running a website. Its a totalitarian grasp for the control of the internet as a whole. The protection fee for publishing houses is just an added bonus for a few corrupt institutions on their deathbed.

Is enforcing copyright censorship? I am not being antagonistic as I have actually no idea what is in this new law.

Re: Four Wikipedias to ‘Black Out’ over EU Copyright Directive

#62

Post by krageon »

LoSboccacc wrote: post #50
kpcyrd wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDPR regulates companies processing personal identifiable information, if your startup can't comply with that it shouldn't exist for the same reasons that a food startup that can't comply with food safety regulations shouldn't exist. Article 13 is straight up impossible to implement.

> if your startup can't comply with that most startups can and will. but it basically adds up the requirement of lawyering up to every startup that wants to operate here de facto annihilating the possibility for single man operations to bootstrap an idea cashless.

It doesn't do that, because you don't need to toe the line.

Re: Four Wikipedias to ‘Black Out’ over EU Copyright Directive

#63

Post by krageon »

tdb7893 wrote: post #26
bArray wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I support their point of view and agree with their protest, but one reason against this could be the potential politicizing and weaponisation of Wikipedia. Do you want one of the largest collectives of human information to take sides (in any debate) and selectively remove its service? I think I would prefer a banner or a landing page more as it doesn't introduce any barrier to the information they provide.

I assume Wikipedia is protesting because it directly affects them. I don't see how it's problematic to advocate for themselves sometimes.

Because it is expected that they are as neutral as possible. People should advocate for encyclopedias, but they should not have opinions themselves. That impression can be argued to be wrong, of course.

Re: Four Wikipedias to ‘Black Out’ over EU Copyright Directive

#64

Post by MrGilbert »

mqus wrote: post #30
bArray wrote: post #25

"Fixing" the page (return to normal): 1. In the style sheet, remove: color: #111 !important; background: #111 !important; border: 1px #111 solid !important; 2. In the HTML, remove: background:#000;color:#000 That's all I could find on a few page visits.

alternatively: use reader mode on firefox. this may not enable everything but is at least you can read it... (I'm somewhat conflicted on using and/or helping circumventing wikipedias efforts)

I'm a bit disappointed that they didn't remove the content completely, using 302-redirects. I'm using uBlock origin, and the whole website looks like a mess. It doesn't even show the "call-to-action" banner, which is required for Average Joe to understand why Wikipedia looks the way it looks.

They could have done better.

Re: Four Wikipedias to ‘Black Out’ over EU Copyright Directive

#65

Post by raverbashing »

orangecat wrote: post #33
confounded wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Article 13 is terrible not because it’s terrible for start-ups, it’s terrible because it’s terrible for people. I’m pretty close to the rough-end of GDPR in my current job, but it represents real benefits for millions of people. If you asked them what’s a reasonable way to treat their data, I believe the GDPR is close-ish to what a lot of Europeans would want. Or, at least a shift in the right direction. Article 13 o…

If you asked them what’s a reasonable way to treat their data, I believe the GDPR is close-ish to what a lot of Europeans would want. I'm pretty sure that if you asked people whether they would prefer to pay for Facebook and Google with cash or by sharing data for ad targeting, most would choose the latter. The GDPR specifically forbids that option. Article 13 on the other hand is what you get if you ask rights-holde…

> I'm pretty sure that if you asked people whether they would prefer to pay for Facebook and Google with cash or by sharing data for ad targeting, most would choose the latter. The GDPR specifically forbids that option.

Yes, in the same way (as an exaggerated example) it forbids people selling their organs for profit or jobs with no salary etc

But the parent is right, this is not only about companies, this has a direct impact on users and freedom of expression

Re: Four Wikipedias to ‘Black Out’ over EU Copyright Directive

#66

Post by raverbashing »

gerdesj wrote: post #22
IdiocyInAction wrote: post #7

As an EU citizen, I hope large portions of the internet will just block us. A couple of days without YouTube, Wikipedia and other services would create sufficient outrage to put pressure on the EU for introducing these idiotic laws. I mean, GDPR is bad enough for start ups, but Article 13?

GDPR and Article 13 (in The Directive on Copyright) are totally different and unrelated things. I happen to be a small business owner in the EU and I have many customers who are the same. We all have registered with the ICO (UK) for something like £60 pa and filled in a short questionnaire. We have read the clear guidance on what records to keep and what to not keep - it's not rocket science. That is GDPR for most sm…

> I understand that A13 looks a bit like an anti-meme effort but it isn't because that is generally covered by parody or reasonable use regulations.

Yes, you just need to find a way of convincing filters your parody is a parody (or other types of fair use) and not C.I. Oh wait there's no way

Re: Four Wikipedias to ‘Black Out’ over EU Copyright Directive

#67

Post by bryanrasmussen »

_nalply wrote: post #59
orangecat wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you asked them what’s a reasonable way to treat their data, I believe the GDPR is close-ish to what a lot of Europeans would want. I'm pretty sure that if you asked people whether they would prefer to pay for Facebook and Google with cash or by sharing data for ad targeting, most would choose the latter. The GDPR specifically forbids that option. Article 13 on the other hand is what you get if you ask rights-holde…

> I'm pretty sure that if you asked people whether they would prefer to pay for Facebook and Google with cash or by sharing data for ad targeting, most would choose the latter. The GDPR specifically forbids that option. Do you have a source for that?

Well since you can't make sharing of personal data a prerequisite for using a service unless it can be shown that data is actually necessary for the operation of the service it could be argued that this follows.

Re: Four Wikipedias to ‘Black Out’ over EU Copyright Directive

#68

Post by raverbashing »

p1necone wrote: post #4
jimmy1 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure why you are being down-voted. I know people have a distaste for political insights in general here, but it seems apt to have comments like these on an article about protesting a governing body. Why is German Wikipedia having to have a blackout? They are unhappy with the EU restricting their freedoms.

I downvoted it because the comment has no substance besides "EU bad". It adds nothing of value to the discussion. Explain why the EU is an "oversized bureaucracy".

> Explain why the EU is an "oversized bureaucracy".

Well if it wasn't then it would be a collection of unelected bureaucrats in Brussels

But that's not what the EU Parliament is, as much as there are issues with it, both people pushing for Art 13 and people against it there were elected.

Re: Four Wikipedias to ‘Black Out’ over EU Copyright Directive

#69

Post by VonGallifrey »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #67
_nalply wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm pretty sure that if you asked people whether they would prefer to pay for Facebook and Google with cash or by sharing data for ad targeting, most would choose the latter. The GDPR specifically forbids that option. Do you have a source for that?

Well since you can't make sharing of personal data a prerequisite for using a service unless it can be shown that data is actually necessary for the operation of the service it could be argued that this follows.

The question was if there is a source on the claim that most people would prefer intrusive ads to paying for a service.

Re: Four Wikipedias to ‘Black Out’ over EU Copyright Directive

#70

Post by bryanrasmussen »

mikekchar wrote: post #40
orangecat wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you asked them what’s a reasonable way to treat their data, I believe the GDPR is close-ish to what a lot of Europeans would want. I'm pretty sure that if you asked people whether they would prefer to pay for Facebook and Google with cash or by sharing data for ad targeting, most would choose the latter. The GDPR specifically forbids that option. Article 13 on the other hand is what you get if you ask rights-holde…

> I'm pretty sure that if you asked people whether they would prefer to pay for Facebook and Google with cash or by sharing data for ad targeting, most would choose the latter. The GDPR specifically forbids that option. First, it's important to distinguish between the types of lawful bases with which you are processing data. For example, if you were to provide a service of targeting ads to people, you do not need con…

> Sign me up for targeted ads! I want them! I will freely give you information so that I can get targeted ads!

The same I was getting at here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18805856

in fact I think I used to get more relevant ads some years ago.

Post reply on HN