Wikimedia warns EU copyright reform threatens the ‘vibrant free web’ • Hacker News Board

Re: Wikimedia warns EU copyright reform threatens the ‘vibrant free web’

#51

Post by blackbrokkoli » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 9:51 PM UTC

jotm wrote: post #25

mike22223333 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia should verify the copyright before allowing changes. It should not be the publishers responsibility to enforce the copyright. Wikipedia should be responsible because they decided they wanted to allow anyone to edit. They should hire moderators, and if they cannot moderate, they should not run a platform of theft.

People who think like this should really chill the fuck out. Ownership of thoughts and ideas is pathetic at best, if you don't want it shared, keep it to yourself. But nooo, "I want everyone to hear me and I want them to know it was me who said it. Me me me. I'm important, I want to feel like it". Get the fuck over it. And if you want to make money off of it, there are plenty of much better ways besides braindead ads…

You realise GDPR is basically the right of keeping things you don't want to be shared to yourself?

And sources are not for the carebears. I mean, too, but they wouldn't be enforced if that would be the only point. It is so that you and I can know where to go to verify or falsify a claim. What would be your alternative proposal?

Ok, let's just give every piece of published source a numeric code or something so we can sort and search and refer too it.

Ok, nobody cares. Let's use the name of the author instead so he has interest that what he says is true and get's used truthfully. Boom, there you have the idea of copyright (in an idealised form)

Re: Wikimedia warns EU copyright reform threatens the ‘vibrant free web’

#52

Post by point78 » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 9:53 PM UTC

nnash wrote: post #48

HeadsUpHigh wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why should foreign companies have to comply with these policies anyway? Because they want revenue from EU citizens? Should a car company from China have to comply to US safety regulations when selling cars to US citizens? >GDPR compliance has already had a negative impact on web UX. Nah. I've switched off tracking on every website I use often via the popups and I've noticed much faster loading. Imo GDPR has made the…

> Should a car company from China have to comply to US safety regulations when selling cars to US citizens? In your example, the car company is implicitly selling to a foreign country. When it comes to software/websites, a user from a foreign country is incidentally served rather than implicitly.

The websites are profiting off the visitors no matter what country they're in. If they don't want to follow the laws then block the country.

Re: Wikimedia warns EU copyright reform threatens the ‘vibrant free web’

#53

Post by CuriousSkeptic » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 10:03 PM UTC

doh wrote: post #31

pjc50 wrote: post #9

Article 13 is the key one, mandating upload filtering. This has all sorts of side effects - suddenly you can't make a Dropbox style file sharing site without implementing pre-emptive filtering. You can't rely on notify-and-takedown. Article 11 potentially has huge implications for social media sites; suddenly a user posting a news article link with a quote becomes a copyright liability. All the worry that was focused…

Absolutely agree. Both articles are a huge mistake for EU and will have incredibly negative impact on users and DSPs while favoring rights holders. The status quo favors DSPs (and indirectly users) but damages rights holders. A solution is badly needed, however it should be one balancing needs of all 3 groups instead of favoring one (or two).

Why should there be “balancing”? The entire premise of copiright is just wrong to begin with.

Here we have this perfectly anti-rival public good produced. But of course anti-rival just doesn’t work that well with free market economics, you know with the externalities and all. And since we just can’t imagine any other form of work allocation schemes than the free market, what to do?!

Naturally the most obvious thing, destroy the pesky anti-rival externalities. Let’s waste as much effort, and misery, as it takes to force it into the shape of the rival goods we all know and love.

It’s quite sad really.

Re: Wikimedia warns EU copyright reform threatens the ‘vibrant free web’

#54

Post by friedman23 » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 10:03 PM UTC

HeadsUpHigh wrote: post #44

nnash wrote: post #42

Can we just agree to silo off the EU? Why should foreign companies have to comply with these policies anyway? GDPR compliance has already had a negative impact on web UX.

>Why should foreign companies have to comply with these policies anyway? Because they want revenue from EU citizens? Should a car company from China have to comply to US safety regulations when selling cars to US citizens? >GDPR compliance has already had a negative impact on web UX. Nah. I've switched off tracking on every website I use often via the popups and I've noticed much faster loading. Imo GDPR has made the…

> Because they want revenue from EU citizens?

First of all not all websites make money.

Secondly, monetizing the EU is a step that usually occurs very late into the life of a startup. Startups almost always monetize the US first.

So if you are a company that owns a website that doesn't make money from the EU and the EU comes up with regulations that adds thousands of dollars in costs and hundreds of thousands of dollars in potential liability to your business, the obvious and easiest solution is to simply shut them off.

We have seen this occur for GDPR and I am confident it will occur for this legislation as well.

Re: Wikimedia warns EU copyright reform threatens the ‘vibrant free web’

#55

Post by qubax » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 10:22 PM UTC

blackbrokkoli wrote: post #49

qubax wrote: post #32

What's with all the comments supporting censorship all of sudden? Every social media site now has hordes of "people" defending censorship. Is it just more european users on social media now? Or is it just government funded trolling? I just don't get it. Saudi arabia just declared online satire as a cybercrime punishable up to 5 years in prison. https://www.france24.com/en/20180904-saudi-arabia-declares-o... We know h…

For real? I was with you until you started trying to sell me the US a good example - if your freedom is so exceptional why... ...do you have an abyssimal rate of reintegration of ex-prisoners to literally every other Western country? ...do you have a president who actively recommends violence against journalists? ...is an absolute majority of your news stations owned by one mega-corp? But we don't even have to go the…

You read a lot into my comment that simply wasn't there. By freedom I was talking about freedom of speech.

> ...do you have an abyssimal rate of reintegration of ex-prisoners to literally every other Western country?

What does this have to do with freedom of speech and censorship online?

> ...do you have a president who actively recommends violence against journalists?

Criticism isn't violence. Stop it.

> ...is an absolute majority of your news stations owned by one mega-corp?

I don't know? Should we have 1 state sponsored news company like the BBC or Xinhua that dominates media? Also, what does this have to do with freedom of speech?

> You are in the most free country, so the best path is to cut the freedom to communicate globally?

No. I said we should protect freedom of speech. In other words, we should communicate globally on our terms, not on censored european, chinese or saudi terms.

> You are in the most free country, so the best path is to cut the freedom to communicate globally?...

Did I say I was against trade?

> needing THE INTERNET (filthy Brits)!

The brits didn't invent the internet. You would think that someone on HN would know the difference between the internet and the web. And even the world wide web was partly invented by a brit. Feel free to look up who invented the "hypertext" in hypertext protocol. Can I ask if you are a journalist or work in the news/media industry? It's obvious you aren't from the tech world.

The US has freedom of speech like no other in the world. If you disagree, then go look at the list of speech you could get arrested for in europe, russia, china, saudi arabia. And compare that to the US. Not sure why you had to bring in trade, prison, US nationalism and a poor understanding of the history of the internet into this. None of that has anything to do with free speech and censorship. I certainly don't think the US is the great at everything. But we certainly do free speech well.

Re: Wikimedia warns EU copyright reform threatens the ‘vibrant free web’

#56

Post by doh » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 10:23 PM UTC

CuriousSkeptic wrote: post #53

doh wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely agree. Both articles are a huge mistake for EU and will have incredibly negative impact on users and DSPs while favoring rights holders. The status quo favors DSPs (and indirectly users) but damages rights holders. A solution is badly needed, however it should be one balancing needs of all 3 groups instead of favoring one (or two).

Why should there be “balancing”? The entire premise of copiright is just wrong to begin with. Here we have this perfectly anti-rival public good produced. But of course anti-rival just doesn’t work that well with free market economics, you know with the externalities and all. And since we just can’t imagine any other form of work allocation schemes than the free market, what to do?! Naturally the most obvious thing,…

I'm sorry but I don't think I follow.

You disagree with the notion, that people that produce content should be paid for it?

I do believe that correct attribution and fair compensation is vital to get quality content. These proposals are not the answer though.

Re: Wikimedia warns EU copyright reform threatens the ‘vibrant free web’

#57

Post by HeadsUpHigh » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 10:25 PM UTC

nnash wrote: post #48

HeadsUpHigh wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why should foreign companies have to comply with these policies anyway? Because they want revenue from EU citizens? Should a car company from China have to comply to US safety regulations when selling cars to US citizens? >GDPR compliance has already had a negative impact on web UX. Nah. I've switched off tracking on every website I use often via the popups and I've noticed much faster loading. Imo GDPR has made the…

> Should a car company from China have to comply to US safety regulations when selling cars to US citizens? In your example, the car company is implicitly selling to a foreign country. When it comes to software/websites, a user from a foreign country is incidentally served rather than implicitly.

Which part of the ip is hard to decode? If you don't like how a country's laws are shaped, then stop selling there. You can't have your pie and eat it too. Either you obey the market laws and sell or you don't. If someone is using a VPN to get around your geo ban, then I think that's the user's implicit choice.

Re: Wikimedia warns EU copyright reform threatens the ‘vibrant free web’

#58

Post by HeadsUpHigh » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 10:27 PM UTC

friedman23 wrote: post #54

HeadsUpHigh wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why should foreign companies have to comply with these policies anyway? Because they want revenue from EU citizens? Should a car company from China have to comply to US safety regulations when selling cars to US citizens? >GDPR compliance has already had a negative impact on web UX. Nah. I've switched off tracking on every website I use often via the popups and I've noticed much faster loading. Imo GDPR has made the…

> Because they want revenue from EU citizens? First of all not all websites make money. Secondly, monetizing the EU is a step that usually occurs very late into the life of a startup. Startups almost always monetize the US first. So if you are a company that owns a website that doesn't make money from the EU and the EU comes up with regulations that adds thousands of dollars in costs and hundreds of thousands of doll…

>Secondly, monetizing the EU is a step that usually occurs very late into the life of a startup. Startups almost always monetize the US first.

It's not a matter of what the founder/CEO of a startup chooses here. I will often open links from e.g. New York Times or other US news sites because something happened in New York or there's an interesting opinion piece that I want to read. These sites are profiting from my clicks so they have to obey the EU laws. If it was impossible for them to determine that I'm an EU citizen then it's a different story but an geo ban is trivial.

Re: Wikimedia warns EU copyright reform threatens the ‘vibrant free web’

#59

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 10:28 PM UTC

doh wrote: post #56

CuriousSkeptic wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should there be “balancing”? The entire premise of copiright is just wrong to begin with. Here we have this perfectly anti-rival public good produced. But of course anti-rival just doesn’t work that well with free market economics, you know with the externalities and all. And since we just can’t imagine any other form of work allocation schemes than the free market, what to do?! Naturally the most obvious thing,…

I'm sorry but I don't think I follow. You disagree with the notion, that people that produce content should be paid for it? I do believe that correct attribution and fair compensation is vital to get quality content. These proposals are not the answer though.

[deleted]

Re: Wikimedia warns EU copyright reform threatens the ‘vibrant free web’

#60

Post by andybak » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 10:29 PM UTC

nnash wrote: post #42

Can we just agree to silo off the EU? Why should foreign companies have to comply with these policies anyway? GDPR compliance has already had a negative impact on web UX.

"We"?

Who are you addressing? Some of us are currently in the EU.