Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's be honest here, I have much bigger fish to fry. I like a free Internet, but it's low on my list of concerns, way below affordable housing, much stricter control of my country's borders, better support for entrepreneurs, more security and better police, etc. I'm not going to vote for a "pirate party" as if that was the most important thing in my life.
> way below affordable housing CDU/EPP does not help with that > much stricter control of my country's borders Do I need to remind which party Merkel is from? CDU > better support for entrepreneurs If you're a big German industrialist you'll get all the help from them, anything else? Nah
European Parliament approves copyright reform
641–650 of 840 posts
Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform
#642Earlier quoted context omitted.
EU Elections are coming up. Vote for the pirate faction in your country or check who voted what and only vote for those parties that voted against A13 or if there are none, parties that are vocal against A13. Same goes for your countries own election cycle.
where can I get the lists of names and how they voted for this specific bill?
It should be available on the site of the european parliament as well.
Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform
#643Earlier quoted context omitted.
You know that, the lawyers know that, but how do you expect the content filtering mechanism to know that??? True, for 4'33'' there is a simple rule that they probably follow - ignore silence :). But for Fountain (if it ever came up) it's hard to imagine that the difference between a protected copy and a non-protected similar image could really be automatically discovered.
This is it. A human being can identify the context. Taking Fountain as an example -- a photo of a urinal on a building merchant's website is an illustration of the product they're selling, not an infringement. But the filter doesn't know about context, it just correlates two images... and you get "Comparison with copyrighted work 'Fountain', 75% match". 75% > 0%, so the filter says "non".
> decisions to disable access to or remove uploaded content shall be subject to human review
intended to handle those cases? I'm not saying that it will be adequate.
Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform
#644Earlier quoted context omitted.
At which point you mark this as a false flag on youtube and youtube tells you to go to court over it.
How many small-time Patreon-funded content creators have the time and money to take on a major media company in court? Just because you could doesn't mean it's feasible from a financial point of view.
A real problem would be the usually long wait.
However, taking into account several more circumstances, either side might not be keen on a court case, and thus provide to avoid it. That hinges on morals and technical details.
The problem with copyright's blurry edges around the originality threshold hasn't changed at least. The Olympics organisation is famous for suing, and loosing often enough, over its trademarks, for example.
> take on a major media company in court
In court or outside? And why the media companies? Laws can be repealed by supreme courts on constitutional grounds. That's an even bigger judicial hurdle to consider. If lobbying or legislative orders are involved, it would be a superset of the problem, as the court is to an extend bound by the lawgivers interpretation of the law, disregarding any side effects that are implementation specific. That's the undefined behaviour of the law. The service nulled all your bits after you passed ownership? The content wasn't registered initially and you assumed it was licensed to null? Ohohoho, none of those side-effects were mandated.
Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform
#645A wild guess: nothing changes, or things even improve somewhat. Not very invested into content distribution. If it has chilling effect on social networks, so be it. And memes can die for all I care.
Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform
#646Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not really? This isn't a flat 'you need to pay 10k a yr regardless of your size' imposition. Proportionality is important. In practice, it will all be up to the judge: 1. Was your AI filter adequate enough to properly filter the content 2. If not, how high can the fine be? There is 1 easy solution to all of this: incorporate outside of the EU.
>In practice, it will all be up to the judge That's the case for any piece of legislation. The test isn't 'if your AI was good enough'. For the majority of people the most important part is: 'is it proportional to even use AI at your size?' To which the answer is no. If you're running a stream or youtube channel of self-created content, the cost of moving dramatically exceeds the total cost of legal risk you're eatin…
Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform
#647Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't a fight between elites and the proles - most people who are framing the result today as such have not read the text of article 11 and 13. And I don't blame them, most articles on the matter conspicuously refuse to link the text, for some reason. This is a fight between titans of industry in two different verticals. Content is upset that publishing is getting all of the money - and a brief examination of th…
They reworded Article 11 and 13 (now 15 and 17) so many times that I wouldn't be surprised if "most people" haven't read the final text... In my opinion the original version with the amendments was simply insane; the work of technologically illiterate lawmakers in conjunction with copyright lobbyists. The final version makes an awkward attempt to fix some of the criticism by simply making things more vague, so each m…
I don't have an issue with political discourse that opposes these articles, given that I criticize them in almost every post I've written in this thread.
I've criticized fearmongering, because it has immediate unwarranted deleterious effects on the European tech scene. Fearmongering is also very lucrative and sensational press material, so there's a need to speak out against it: it comprises the overwhelming majority of reporting on the issue.
Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform
#648Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The media is usually biased towards left-wing ideology, with a globalist spin. Since Macron embodies both those ideals, it's easy to see why he gets helped by the media. Ahahah, the good joke. Most medias, everywhere world-wide are owned by billionars and follow the media-line of their owner. These guys are of course, conservative, right side, sometimes liberal .... but definitively not "left". Qualifying guys like…
> Ahahah, the good joke. Mmm... Can you explain the media in the US are so much against Trump--with the majority of journalists still pushing for fake news about Russian bots and government intervention even after official investigations are closed, and with some of them even crying live when the Muller investigation conclusions came out? Or, can you explain why most major news outlets in the States are categorized a…
The official investigation confirmed—and charged specific Russian actors for—the “Russian bots and government intervention”. Even the AG Trump chose during, and for the rather transparent purpose of whitewashing, the investigation has highlighted that in his summary, stating: “The Special Counsel's investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election. [...] The second element involved the Russian government's efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks.” [0]
> with some of them even crying live when the Muller investigation conclusions came out?
Arguably Mueller investigation conclusions have not “come out” in any meaningful sense, only a self-serving summary by a Trump loyalist who has a long history of opposing Presidential accountability to the law (not just for Trump.)
> Or, can you explain why most major news outlets in the States are categorized as biased towards left-wing causes on https://mediabiasfactcheck.com?
Can you provide any basis for believing the site you cite is a reliable neutral arbiter?
[0] https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/24/politics/read-mueller-key-fin...
Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform
#649Earlier quoted context omitted.
> way below affordable housing CDU/EPP does not help with that > much stricter control of my country's borders Do I need to remind which party Merkel is from? CDU > better support for entrepreneurs If you're a big German industrialist you'll get all the help from them, anything else? Nah
I'm not German, idk what are you talking about.
Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform
#650As I said on one of the other threads... 26 March 2019. The day the Internet died. (at least in Europe) But of course -- "the Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it" -- so what we're likely to see is a massive spike in people streaming video over encrypted tunnels into other countries. That'd be interesting. It'd render GeoIP rather moot, among other things. I suspect the EU and Member States'…
Not everyone who wants to route around has technical knowledge, so for the vast majority of people this would be the end of it. Then the governments will mandate ISPs to filter encrypted traffic etc, etc..
I don't believe "VPNs are banned" is as much of a big deal for EU to implement as you think.