Live data from Hacker News

European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

bbc.com

141–150 of 407 posts

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#141
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Second it's hard not to notice that much of what the EU does is try to hurt US tech companies I totally understand what you are saying, but on the other hand: maybe a lot of US tech companies do unethical/bad things? Antitrust cases must be based on something, so it's not just tariff on tech company products, it's more like a fine for bad behaviour.

> Antitrust cases must be based on something A study of the history of Antitrust would abuse of of that naive thinking.

I’m truly not overly familiar with the history of such cases. I’d appreciate some direction on how to undertake such a study. Any good places to start reading about this?

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#142

This is what happens when those in control don't understand, know or care about the things they regulate. So I guess this is bad. --goes and reads article-- > Article 11, requiring online platforms to pay publishers a fee if they link to their news content, was also approved. What the fucking FUCK? Pay to send companies actual traffic? Pay to be allowed to use the basic building-block of the world wide web on the wor…

On the one hand I can see how stupid these laws are in view of how the Web currently works and how successful it is.

On the other hand, I think companies like Google and Facebook are FAR too large and powerful and I think the only way to deal with that is by making the Web less good at what it does.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#143
post #107

As a EU citizen I have always been (and still am) a strong advocate for the European Union. I think the founding of the European Union was one of the greatest things that could ever happen to European citizens. I full heartedly believe this institution played a major role in retaining the piece after World War 2. The concept of open borders in (most of) Europe is something I would never want to miss. But seeing the l…

Retaining the "piece"... WW2 ended in 1945. The EU came into being in 1993. Was it retaining it in previous guises as a trade federation - the EEC, and before that the European Coal and Steel Community? Or are you thinking of NATO? > The concept of open borders in (most of) Europe is something I would never want to miss. In what context? "I don't have to show my passport on holidays - yay!" or "people can drive from…

[deleted]

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#144

This is what happens when those in control don't understand, know or care about the things they regulate. So I guess this is bad. --goes and reads article-- > Article 11, requiring online platforms to pay publishers a fee if they link to their news content, was also approved. What the fucking FUCK? Pay to send companies actual traffic? Pay to be allowed to use the basic building-block of the world wide web on the wor…

I think that Article 11 will backfire. What if Google decides to remove all publishers from search results to avoid having to pay a fee? Their traffic will tank.

If Google doesn't link to anything anymore, its own traffic may hurt a bit as well.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#145

EU has long proven record of making laws targeting specific big players and not caring about smaller local businesses and specifically not caring about promoting competition. VAT MOSS disaster didn't generate that much discussion because the ones hurt were busy selling their sweaters on Etsy and didn't have time to take it to the streets. I just hope with this one we can get some mechanism where you waive your fees/l…

> I just hope with this one we can get some mechanism where you waive your fees/licensing in the html header and then your stuff is freely linked by the engines.

There's actually a proposal by Axel Voss (the MEP pushing this the most) to explicit forbid waiving it, since previous laws like this "didn't work" because nearly everyone waived their fees... It's truly a disgrace.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#146

If I may play the devil's advocate for a moment here, isn't this a boon for decentralizing media? If third-party publishers like YouTube are crippled, perhaps there's more room for self-hosting your content, enabling you to build your brand on your own terms rather than YouTube's? Perhaps it's time to stop outsourcing the publication of our content to third-parties and host it ourselves, especially now that granularl…

No, it won't help with decentralization. Only big players will have enough money and resources to implement these filters and requirements effectively, small news aggregations that work for 100 users will just disappear. I imagine there will be boom for companies that identify and track text and multimedia online and report it automatically. I don't think services that work for small number of users will be able to afford their API.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#148

So in the case of this link does that mean that HN would have to pay the BBC or filter the link out?

Only for EU IP addresses. Seems like a good way to keep their people ignorant akin to China or NK firewalls. But in a way that appears less authoritarian and "to protect EU business interests".

Lets face it - power structures are terrified of the open communication available today and how everyone is able to organize and see through their BS.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#149
post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Second it's hard not to notice that much of what the EU does is try to hurt US tech companies These are European laws designed to regulate industry inside the EU. If an American company decides to do business in the EU they're subject to the same rules as any business already operating inside the EU. So claiming this is designed to hurt US tech companies is quite a reach. If you feel American tech companies are bei…

That's a dishonest argument, yeah these laws theoretically apply to everyone but they were designed specifically for and disportionately affect US companies. As for the "gaming the system" argument that doesn't comport with really either since these laws were introduced after the fact.

> That's a dishonest argument.

Honestly, I felt the same about your argument. What you're suggesting is that American companies should not abide the the same laws as European companies when doing business in Europe. Which is an awfully biased position to take.

Have you actually stopped to look at why some US companies have been hit? The anti-trust cases, for example, highlighted some highly unethical behaviour. Also have you actually spent any time researching into whether European companies come under the same scrutiny or are you just assuming it doesn't happen because you only read about American business over in America? Spoiler alert, the EU does come down on European businesses equally hard.

I get that the American philosophy to business is often about deregulation. But that's not how Europe works and if American companies want to do business in the EU then it's only fair that they have to follow the same rules as European business do.

Like I said before, if you want to sell imported goods in America then those goods still have to meet American safety standards. We all agree that is acceptable. And equally I'm sure you agree that European companies who do business in America should abide by American law. So why should it be any different with EU regulations?

[edit] I'm not going to defend the copyright reform though. That proposal is just dumb. But in terms of your point, I can see it hurting EU businesses as well as American ones.

Re: European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Article 11, requiring online platforms to pay publishers a fee if they link to their news content, was also approved. >What the fucking FUCK? This does not surprise me! If your site has for example 5 article titles from CNN, linking all of them to original CNN articles, probably you have more benefit from that than CNN. People this days like to skim through titles and not even bothering to read full articles, to c…

So then obviously CNN should never write an article again and isn't a profitable business... That is complete and utter nonsense. Linking itself adds value - see the uproar with Facebook getting rid of news in the feed. If the publishers genuinely felt as you do, they would simply prevent content being linked to by Google News/etc. Instead they want to demand payment for it, and force the behavior instead of letting…

If a single publisher chooses to do that, they only hurt themselves, Google is far too big.

If it's forced for all publishers, it might actually have an effect.

Post reply on HN