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

Post by komodosquirrel » Wed, Sep 12, 2018, 9:46 PM UTC

headmelted wrote: post #519

So bad is this legislation that it's almost enough to make me change my views on Brexit. It's ludicrous to me that the same body that approved something so user-centric as GDPR could come up with legislation so incredibly hostile to small players as to effectively abolish the open internet by financial attrition. Once this comes in, we'll collectively need to finally start work on that peer-to-peer, onion-layered, en…

Post by komodosquirrel » Wed, Sep 12, 2018, 9:51 PM UTC

woolvalley wrote: post #548

headmelted wrote: post #519

So bad is this legislation that it's almost enough to make me change my views on Brexit. It's ludicrous to me that the same body that approved something so user-centric as GDPR could come up with legislation so incredibly hostile to small players as to effectively abolish the open internet by financial attrition. Once this comes in, we'll collectively need to finally start work on that peer-to-peer, onion-layered, en…

Snort, the GDPR is fairly hostile to small players by pretending they don't exist when they wrote the law. It's like signing a contract with employee hostile clauses that the employer pinky swears they will never use. There is probably a similar pattern of ignore the small players in other new EU laws, but since it's not my industry I don't hear about them.

Post by raxxorrax » Wed, Sep 12, 2018, 9:56 PM UTC

closeparen wrote: post #577

Grumbledour wrote: post #78

As terrible as this is, I am actually even more shocked by this proposal: https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/12/europe-to-push-for-one-hou... Having one hour to remove offending content, draconian fines and no, absolutely no exceptions for small content providers would, I think, end the internet as we know it in Europe. I see no way to host any kind of content under such jurisdiction and surely all non European content p…

The pro-GDPR "good riddance" argument applies just as well here: obliterating operations which are too fly-by-night to obey the law is, in fact, the socially desired outcome. The law is the law. We shouldn't exempt small players from internet regulation any more than we should exempt small factories from pollution controls or small automakers from safety rules. European institutions do no wrong [0]. If a website's co…

Post by trendia » Wed, Sep 12, 2018, 10:02 PM UTC

dmix wrote: post #504

bepotts wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US tech giants haven't worried about competition coming from Europe for awhile now. They worry about competition coming from either within the country or China.

What about foreign companies operating in europe...wouldn't they have to comply? Or does this only apply to companies with headquarters in Europe?

Post by untog » Wed, Sep 12, 2018, 10:12 PM UTC

linuxftw wrote: post #724

0x5f3759df-i wrote: post #711

>However, those backing these provisions say the arguments above are the result of scaremongering by big US tech companies, eager to keep control of the web’s biggest platforms. This is the most hilarious quote in the article. The only thing this will do is entrench massive players like Google and Facebook who already have these systems in place. I honestly cannot comprehend how anyone could support this law while ha…

> Do these politicians really not understand the awful implications of these filtering systems for free speech and fair use? They believe what their wealthy donors tell them to believe. It won't affect the well connected politicians in any measurable way, they'll still be wealthy. Meanwhile, independent organizations will suffer while the big players get all the sweet licensing deals. Regulations are ALWAYS about pun…