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

European parliament committee approves vote on ‘disastrous’ copyright bill

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 407 posts

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

#321

Post by tunesmith »

rocketraman wrote: post #304
srah763 wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because her entire “philosophy” is egotistical selfishness, in her own words. So the opposite of good and profoundly ignorant. No point in rehashing 1000 year old debates that were settled long ago on this type of behavior.

This comment is profoundly ignorant. You're dismissing her philosophy because of two descriptive words (and not even the best two, which would probably be "rational selfishness"), which you have decided are the "opposite of good" simply because history says they are? That's just an appeal to tradition: plenty of people have been wrong about plenty of things throughout history, especially in the areas of morality and…

I've always seen objectivism as a branch of consequentialism. Utilitarianism is a different branch of consequentialism, in that it seeks to maximize the greater good for others. Objectivism seeks the maximize the good for the self. "Rational selfishness" is a fine enough description, I suppose, except for the cases where the two words conflict, like in tragedy of the commons.

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

#322

Post by tunesmith »

TooBrokeToBeg wrote: post #309
srah763 wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes this happens to not be one of those cases, espousing the virtues of selfishness isn’t up for debate anymore. It’s wrong, and has been shown to be so time and time again. To have to rehash such foolishness is pointless.

> It’s wrong ...and natural and efficient. ie Not wrong or right. I'm not sure where you get your ideas from.

The Nash equilibrium is also natural, efficient, and non-optimal in many cases. Which, in the face of "optimal", could be described as "wrong" if the belief is that optimal is desirable.

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

#323

Post by Joeri »

Buge wrote: post #252
phicoh wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are quite a few similar rights. One example is that radio stations don't have enter agreements with individual rights owners to license songs. There is blanket fee. Similar payments are for playing music in bars, restaurants and other public spaces, for copying machines, blank CDs (and video and cassette tape), etc. All of those fees are set to collect money, not to kill of that use. The difference this time, i…

>One example is that radio stations don't have enter agreements with individual rights owners to license songs. Isn't that because the music creator already entered an agreement with a rights organization? If the music creator didn't enter an agreement with a rights organization, the station would have to directly enter an agreement with the musician. The musician has the power to decide whether to sign with the orga…

The musician doesn't have much choice here. Radio stations will only perform music licensed by the rights organizations, so either they join and get some money, or they don't and get zip. Rights organizations typically invert the burden of proof. Even worse, if they do join, in many countries they are no longer allowed to license their music in another way. In Belgium for example they are expressly forbidden from releasing their own music under a creative commons license.

Another thing rights organizations are notorious for are overbroad claims. They invert the burden of proof and require all performances to prove they are not playing licensed songs, and all music publishers to prove they are not publishing licensed songs. There is a lot of bureaucracy involved with this inverted burden of proof, which has no legal basis except that rights organizations can afford big legal bills and those on the other side mostly cannot.

I find this whole rights organization business to be nothing but a legalized racket.

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

#324

Post by tunesmith »

ngold wrote: post #294
SequoiaHope wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to say, I heard all this talk of Ayn Rand as some kind of evil bogeyman, and then I listened to her speak on YouTube. She grew up in a horrible communist dictatorship, and then found refuge in the US. She spoke about how unfair governments can be, and spoke out against forced control of the people. I found her to be super reasonable! She only represents one persons view and I feel that libertarians often fail…

Being that her friend and apprentice was Alan Greenspan you can see where people get a little weird about rand. Also the rand think tank that spews serious amounts of fascist policy.

That's why it was so newsworthy when Greenspan went on the record of being completely flummoxxed about the global financial system crisis back in the late 2000s. "Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders' equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked disbelief."

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

#325

Post by Kliment »

andy_ppp wrote: post #234
tomp wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a list of who voted and how available anywhere?

I wonder if any of these people have received campaign funding from entrenched industries that benefit from draconian copyright laws? Having said that, GDPR has actually turned out to be a very well thought through piece of legislation - I actually agree with it's premises largely and the fact we can't take a database dump anymore and have full access to people's personal details is an extremely good thing IMO. How F…

> I wonder if any of these people have received campaign funding from entrenched industries that benefit from draconian copyright laws?

Yes. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180531/00285739946/eu-pa...

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

#326

Post by dfxm12 »

hartator wrote: post #282
sebst wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Don’t forget compliance with GDPR probably means it’s not possible to comply with this new copyright laws. Fun times for EU startups. GDPR is a good example of another law which is potentially dangerous. However, I do see that it's hard to comply with both, but I don't see how they interact with other. > P.S.: Taking some risks quoting Ayn Rand on HN. :) Why?

> GDPR is a good example of another law which is potentially dangerous. However, I do see that it's hard to comply with both, but I don't see how they interact with other. The copyright law requires you to store metadata about the user who publish content forever while GDPR forbids you to do so. > Why? I would say most of HN leans left not libertarian.

I would say most of HN leans left not libertarian.

I would've thought so too, until I looked at discussions about unions on here.

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

#327

Post by Kliment »

tomp wrote: post #299
lumberjack wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.votewatch.eu/

I couldn't find the vote there... Looks like it's just the Parliament votes? (this was a committee vote)

Here are the votes:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/149721/juri-committee-...

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

#328

Post by Kliment »

tomp wrote: post #101
mrleiter wrote: post #12

It was approved on in a committee of the European parliament (for legal matters), which means that now they will enter negotiations with the European Council and then after some time and processes laid out in Art. 293ff TFEU, it will be debated in the European Parliament at some point. So yes, there is still plenty of room and time to discuss this rather unfortunate policy. EDIT: For more info: http://www.europarl.eu…

Is there a list of who voted and how available anywhere?

Yes, here http://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/149721/juri-committee-...

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

#330

Post by glitchc »

aiisahik wrote: post #171

I once wrote a thesis on DMCA and Youtube during that huge Viacom vs Youtube litigation was going on. The copyright holders wanted to shift more of the burden of detecting and blocking copyright breach onto the web services by removing the DMCA safe harbor. Youtube ultimately won the case but they also implemented much of what Viacom wanted anyway - a fairly aggressive content filter that probably caught most of what…

Regarding the small aggregators, perhaps they shouldn't be aggregating, but rather producing their own content? It's a problem when a blog copies a Reuters or Associated Press article verbatim just to garner some ad views.
Post reply on HN