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

EU approves internet copyright law, including ‘link tax’ and ‘upload filter’

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 1001 posts

Re: EU approves internet copyright law, including ‘link tax’ and ‘upload filter’

#351

Post by kgwgk »

isthatart wrote: post #179
kgwgk wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of effect do you think that these laws could have on your use of arXiv?

Two more examples examples for arXiv and one for Figshare. (1) Article in journal has a flaw. For some reason the journal is slow or unhelpful concerning a correct version, so the author posts on arXiv a revised and perhaps much bigger version. Filters (will these be on arXiv?) detect a copyright infringement. (2) I translate an Euler article and post it on arXiv (with all attributions). Or an English translation of…

If something was a copyright violation yesterday, it will still be a copyright violation tomorrow. And vice versa.

If you fear that arXiv will implement filters that will recognize that what you are uploading is a translation of an obscure Prussian research paper and block the upload, I don't think that's going to happen. (But I will be really impressed if it happens!)

Re: EU approves internet copyright law, including ‘link tax’ and ‘upload filter’

#352

Post by LoSboccacc »

Shaddox wrote: post #82
ericdykstra wrote: post #6

UKIP and the Green Party joined forces to prevent Article 13 from getting rammed through without a public discussion. It was a good first step, but here we are, 2 months hence, and it was passed with virtually no amendments to the original text. This is an abhorrent decision by people who have no idea how the internet works. Markus Meechum (aka Count Dankula) was at the hearings, and reported that MEPs voting on the…

I may be naive in saying this, but I believe the law is made with good intentions in mind. The real problem lies in the laws it relies on, namely the extremely stringent copyright laws and the weird fair use. > Much of YouTube content is (perfectly legal) remixes, responses, or criticisms of other YouTube content that embeds part of the referenced video in their own video. As weird as it sounds, you are wrong. In a s…

> I believe the law is made with good intentions in mind

the first time around? _maybe_

after the enormous backslash and numerous expert opinion pieces decrying the exact problems of the proposal? _hardly_

Re: EU approves internet copyright law, including ‘link tax’ and ‘upload filter’

#353

Post by zaarn »

isthatart wrote: post #197
zaarn wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would any of that happen? I don't think the internet copyright proposal will affect things in a way you describe...

Why not? AFAIK about a 1/3 of the arXiv articles are later published in journals.

Why would you? The Link Tax and Upload Filter specifically affect service providers that moderate user content to generate profit, if you upload something with explicit consent of all rightholders then this is explicitly exempted from the directive.

Re: EU approves internet copyright law, including ‘link tax’ and ‘upload filter’

#354

Post by mscasts »

Brede wrote: post #261
Scarblac wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are bound by treaties to implement EU directives like this. Part of the single market.

Technically, we can say no. But our politicians never do. My guess is that they do not want to step on any toes, which could make getting a sweet job in Brussels after their term ends harder.

If there is great resistance from the public after it becomes a disaster for all eu-countries it is much more likely to not go through than in an eu-country with resistance.

Re: EU approves internet copyright law, including ‘link tax’ and ‘upload filter’

#355

Post by antidesitter »

pluma wrote: post #127
scoom wrote: post #22

If GDPR didn't make you block the EU, this will.

I have no idea how you think those two are even remotely related or in the same category. Oh, and by the way, as long as you show something to EU visitors (even an error page telling them to GTFO), you need a privacy policy.

> I have no idea how you think those two are even remotely related or in the same category.

They’re both controversial EU-wide regulations, for one.

Re: EU approves internet copyright law, including ‘link tax’ and ‘upload filter’

#356

Post by throwaway-hn123 »

briandear wrote: post #233
pjc50 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Markus Meechum (aka Count Dankula) Do we really not have anyone better as a source than the Nazi dog guy? http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/8/1962/PF-v-Mark-Meecha... (Perhaps someone from Open Rights Group or EDRI?)

Nazi Dog Guy is a perfect example of what’s wrong with the EU/Britain. He got in trouble for offending people. That is ridiculous that there are laws against offending people.

Cry more, snowflake.

Re: EU approves internet copyright law, including ‘link tax’ and ‘upload filter’

#357

Post by briandear »

yummybear wrote: post #322
vorpalhex wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you are in the EU, you are not allowed to use this website." Pretty much the same solution for kids under 13 years of age (which is to say, they of course still do use these sites, they simply lie about it which shifts the burden...)

Yeah, but wouldn't cutting 500 million of the wealthiest customers from your solution have a pretty significant business impact?

Google left China; a far bigger market than Europe.

Re: EU approves internet copyright law, including ‘link tax’ and ‘upload filter’

#358

Post by lolc »

gutnor wrote: post #219
Shaddox wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be naive in saying this, but I believe the law is made with good intentions in mind. The real problem lies in the laws it relies on, namely the extremely stringent copyright laws and the weird fair use. > Much of YouTube content is (perfectly legal) remixes, responses, or criticisms of other YouTube content that embeds part of the referenced video in their own video. As weird as it sounds, you are wrong. In a s…

> The real problem lies in the laws it relies on, namely the extremely stringent copyright laws and the weird fair use. Real problem is the negative incentive to be correct. The rule penalise you harshly if you serve copyrighted content, but there is nothing if you decide to not serve non-copyrighted content and there is so much content on the internet, that "market pressure" simply isn't going to work. If you are a…

To a first approximation there is no such thing as "non-copyrighted content" except for very old content. If you're the creator you already have to license your creation to the platform.

Re: EU approves internet copyright law, including ‘link tax’ and ‘upload filter’

#359

Post by AriaMinaei »

ericdykstra wrote: post #6

UKIP and the Green Party joined forces to prevent Article 13 from getting rammed through without a public discussion. It was a good first step, but here we are, 2 months hence, and it was passed with virtually no amendments to the original text. This is an abhorrent decision by people who have no idea how the internet works. Markus Meechum (aka Count Dankula) was at the hearings, and reported that MEPs voting on the…

The 'against' camp is badly misunderstood. We're taken for pirates. And not the good kind! Example of a tweet chat with Howard Goodall: https://twitter.com/ariaminaei/status/1039856894893010945

Re: EU approves internet copyright law, including ‘link tax’ and ‘upload filter’

#360

Post by snaky »

ericdykstra wrote: post #68
Retr0spectrum wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The likes of YouTube will be affected the least. They already have aggressive copyright enforcement measures in place, and they can afford to do that. Smaller, more independent platforms will not be able to afford to implement compliance with these new regulations, and will potentially be driven out of business.

YouTube, the company, will be fine. They'll just ban any content that triggers their enforcement systems. I'm worried about YouTube, the platform, and the bastion of free exchange of information and ideas that is has been until now. A response-type video or movie review will almost certainly be false-flagged by a system like this. Of course, I agree with you that independent platforms are going to have a rough time.…

The worse for YouTube the platform, the better for free, decentralized, federated competitor platforms like PeerTube.
Post reply on HN