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

European Parliament approves copyright reform

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 840 posts

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#381

Post by Xelbair »

antientropic wrote: post #53
DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #16

Am I the only one who kinda feels like I'm not living in a democratic system anymore? Not saying this is the first such thing that happens, but it's probably the one that will make me stop using the word to refer to the society I live in.

Democracy does not mean that you always get what you want. A majority in parliament and the council were in favor of this law, so you can't say it's undemocratic.

is it democratic for most elected governments to keep pushing for legislature again and again, waiting a bit between attempts? Repeat it ad nauseam um 'till people get bored of protesting.

Just a reminder that quite a lot of people are against second brexit referendum because repeating it would be undemocratic.

Remember ACTA? how many times it was tried again and again under different name?

The only ones who wanted those articles to pass were media organizations akin to RIAA - which frankly speaking are a parasite of the industry, which have tons of money to burn on legal lobbying.

And nowadays - where artists can directly sell their works to customers - they are absolutely unneeded.

Plus the whole idea of upload filter is absolutely idiotic. It will either do nothing, but give excuse to further escalate the law(especially if it goes towards centralized content filter - which could be easily used for censorship). Or it will be implemented in similar vein to youtube copyright system - no way to decently appeal, automated process that tags more content than it should, taking the least amount of effort.

Link tax on the other hand was already tried in few countries - Germany and Spain or Portugal(forgot which one it was) - in former case most media outlets signed a contract with search engine and social media corporations that they can list their content for free.. in other case such contracts were forbidden and media outlets reported a loss of profit - because way less people were visiting their sites - they disappeared from indexing services, and social media platforms - which serve as a form of advertising.

Also - didn't EU post a study that piracy actually boosted sales and profits of movies and music? Because it works as free advertising, and most(but not all) of pirates wouldn't buy the product anyways. (https://juliareda.eu/2017/09/secret-copyright-infringement-s...)

On a side note you should never ever accept a law just because you trust a current government to not abuse it. You cannot 100% prove that in future there won't be a government that will abuse it.

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#382

Post by amelius »

lagadu wrote: post #290
amelius wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to see who voted yes, plus I want to read for each MEP a short statement explaining why they think it is a good idea. Better yet, a short video fragment with their statement, so the media can use that to make them look stupid when this legislation turns out to be a total failure.

I'm curious why you're not making the same demands out of the ones who voted no.

There's no reason I wouldn't want this.

In fact I think it should be standard procedure for every poll. Making MEPs publicly state the reason for their vote makes them more accountable and this at least makes them think (hopefully).

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#383

Post by rorykoehler »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #373
rorykoehler wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tbh this should be an open sourced non profit tool by eff or similar

EFF wouldn't want to dignify this law by creating a tool like that. They are fully against it.

It's a poor plan b but possibly the best one.

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#384

Post by philpem »

csunbird wrote: post #340
Xelbair wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, i am really curious what approach will content hosting companies take. Will they analyze each video if it is a illegal or legal one, checking everything... or just implement a simple, fast and cheap filter that will block most of the content, with no way to appeal the ruling, just like youtube is doing now...

While I do agree with your point on this, I do not think the Youtube's Content ID is cheap at all.

I seriously doubt Google would licence it to potential competitors either.

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#385

Post by EpicEng »

rurban wrote: post #367
philpem wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need only look at the rampant abuse of Content ID to see what the likely result will be... "Sorry, the video you uploaded 'Me playing Beethoven on the piano' contains BEETHOVEN'S 5TH SYMPHONY by BMG-EMI-XYZ Music Corp. You cannot upload this video."

This would be an invalid flag. BMG-EMI-XYZ Music Corp does not own this work, they could only own a certain recording of a certain orchestra playing this piece. And we know that detecting that certain recording via music matching does not work, only checking the strong hash of it would work. Which would be trivial to circumvent by a single bit-flip.

Does it matter when the average person has little to no recourse in the matter? Does it matter when e.g. YT will _punish_ you if you decide to contest it and lose per their arbitrary process?

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#387

Post by thirdsun »

rurban wrote: post #367
philpem wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need only look at the rampant abuse of Content ID to see what the likely result will be... "Sorry, the video you uploaded 'Me playing Beethoven on the piano' contains BEETHOVEN'S 5TH SYMPHONY by BMG-EMI-XYZ Music Corp. You cannot upload this video."

This would be an invalid flag. BMG-EMI-XYZ Music Corp does not own this work, they could only own a certain recording of a certain orchestra playing this piece. And we know that detecting that certain recording via music matching does not work, only checking the strong hash of it would work. Which would be trivial to circumvent by a single bit-flip.

> BMG-EMI-XYZ Music Corp does not own this work.

Hasn't stopped big companies from making false claims before. After all they are the ones responding (and likely rejecting) the appeal of the uploader. See: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/09/sorry-sony-music...

> And we know that detecting that certain recording via music matching does not work, only checking the strong hash of it would work. Which would be trivial to circumvent by a single bit-flip.

So you're saying that even Google hasn't made upload filters work reliably? Who can if not the company behind Youtube?

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#388

Post by koonsolo »

buboard wrote: post #263

This is a great day for creators in the EU. We are finally going to be able to upload our creations safely, in a platform that nobody will ever pay for. https://www.article13.org/best-of

I have a hard time understanding whether this is a parody site or not.

I'm sure the automated filters will do a better job than me to make the distinction between parody or original.

Maybe we should let such a filter run on that website, so we know it's a parody or not.

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#389

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

isostatic wrote: post #73
DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #16

Am I the only one who kinda feels like I'm not living in a democratic system anymore? Not saying this is the first such thing that happens, but it's probably the one that will make me stop using the word to refer to the society I live in.

The EU Parliament, who we vote for every 5 years (and have elections coming up), vote for a law. You don't like said law, therefore it's undemocratic? The way the parliament is elected is quite fair - it gives a little more power to people in smaller countries, but that's not unusual (UK westminster constituencies vary from 22k to 120k. U.S. congress areas are more even, ranging from 500k to 1 million). There's an ar…

>The way the parliament is elected is quite fair - it gives a little more power to people in smaller countries, but that's not unusual (UK westminster constituencies vary from 22k to 120k. U.S. congress areas are more even, ranging from 500k to 1 million). There's an argument that it should be more even than the current 11:1 ratio, but we call the U.S. senate democratic and that's a 69:1 ratio.

At least call out the House of Representatives, that's what supposed to truly represent individuals. The senate is supposed to be at a state level by design (originally of course it was supposed to be a check on the general public, but it doesn't work that way anymore).

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#390

Post by minton »

jaabe wrote: post #321

I know this is an extremely unpopular opinion, but I’m actually fine with more equality in copyright legislation. These “disastrous” copyright laws already apply to you and me, and if you think they don’t, then just try hosting a top 1 music video on your personal domain. Where the laws don’t apply is if your service is to host user content and you have the size to circumvent justice. YouTube makes a lot of money off…

I don’t think YouTube is against this law either. It limits their competition by raising the barrier of entry for the next YouTube. The main problem with this type of legislation is they hurt competition because only the large, established corporations can afford the legal and technical investments required for compliance. YouTube isn’t phased by this, they’ll barely notice but they’re happy knowing a tiny startup from a garage won’t be able to compete.
Post reply on HN