201–204 of 204 posts
Here are part of the lyrics of "Enter Sandman" of Metallica: Exit light Enter night Take my hand We're off to Never—, Neverland Now I lay me down to sleep Pray the Lord my soul to keep If I die before I wake Pray the Lord my soul to take YCombinator is now in violation of article 13. Some filter should have prevented me from posting this. That is what article 13 is about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are missing the "user content" part. If I anonymously upload copyrighted material to YouTube, I can sue YouTube. Same with Reddit, Facebook, Steam, Kongregate, Pinterest, Imgur, Instagram, ... . I'm building a platform where anyone can make a game and share it. If someone names his game "Zelda" or "Tetris", I can get sued. If my competitor uploads his own material to my site, they can sue me. Theses platforms sho…
If the user is anonymous, so as copyright holder, or target of harassment or whatever I can't know who is the creator of the content, it makes perfectly sense for me that you, as host of the content are liable of the content itself. I don't see anything strange about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. That's how it works. See [1] and [2]. Although by the time it'll be enacted it'll likely be 27 interpretations. It's not worse, just different. The EU has a history of experimenting with directives that later become core EU regulations. E.g. the GDPR existed in one form or another for the last 20 years as privacy and data processing rules the EU directed EU/EEA members to implement. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w…
Thanks for the links. I do think it is worse because rather than 27 laws (one for each jurisdiction), you have 1 law with 27 interpretations, and unclear jurisdiction. For instance, What might be treated as fair use in one jurisdiction could be treated as criminal in another. In the US, while we may have different state laws, copyright and speech are managed at the Federal level, so there is only one hierarchy to nav…
The EU isn't making serious crimes like murder, arson etc. illegal, that's left to member states. It regulates market policy. Think something closer to NAFTA than the Federal government.
But if you squint hard you can think of EU directives as some sort of equivalent of the Federal government obligating individual states to regulate a certain topic within a given framework, without spelling out exactly how that must be accomplished.
That allows for local experimentation and flexibility. Whether you think that's a good or a bad thing I guess comes down to the philosophical argument of how close rule making should be to the governed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is fair representation in matters that an economical union should decide, but it is not fair representation when the EU became a political union - almost no German lives in the country and yet German citizens have more control over it than Czech citizens do. The EU does not need to regulate everything, or even most things. The Czech Republic tries to promote distributed multi-level government (so only people liv…
The copryight directive is about unifying copyright law and rules in the EU. It's about making it easier to offer services to all EU citizens. If the EU doesn't regulate some area, naturally countries will have different rules, making inner EU trade in that matter difficult. The countries of the EU, including Germany, can't survive on their own in a world where there's the USA, China and India. We need a strong entit…
Then the Habsburgs gradually took that away from us and that made us angry in a poetic way in the 1770's, which has caused the Czech National Revival and has formed all of contemporary Czech culture.