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

821–830 of 1001 posts

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

#821

Post by camgunz »

anigbrowl wrote: post #784
jules wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I honestly cannot comprehend how anyone could support this law while having any understanding of how the internet works. These are the same politicians that brought us the law that forces every website to ask EU visitors permission to store cookies with a big fat modal dialog, so I don't think you need to worry that people who any understanding of how the internet works supported this law. Imagine all the time wast…

Imagine all the time wasted on those modal dialogs and add up the total cost in human lives. GMAFB, nobody is dying because they're being asked to consent or refuse cookie tracking. If you are worried about that then why haven't I see you complaining about the modal dialogs and umpteen other other impositions inflicted upon users by marketing departments?

My main objection to it is that it doesn't at all solve the problem. Everyone clicks "accept", people still don't know what cookies (etc.) are, it was yet another silly regulation that harms small players and entrenches megacorps, and overall makes the internet less fun and more corporate junk.

Real regulations about this stuff require real technical expertise, and it's going to be at least a generation before that expertise exists in the political class. The alternative is to let the tech lobby write the regulations, but booooooooo.

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

#822

Post by rrcaptain »

adventured wrote: post #550
rrcaptain wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you joking? HN is owned by YCombinator, one of the most powerful companies in the Valley. If it's Mom and Pop, than so is Mitt Romney's hedgefund.

Nothing fundamentally has changed about HN as Y Combinator has become more successful over time. Your premise pretends that both HN's long-term and initial success rests on the present riches of Y Combinator - that's false. HN runs on one server and is moderated by just a couple of people typically. It is in fact the definition of a mom & pop operation. It does not have a zillion dollar budget, either for operations…

Mom & Pop, by definition, refers to the ownership of the medium. Not how many people work on it.

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

#823

Post by mygo »

liveoneggs wrote: post #112
mygo wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that they show people's content without giving them page views Are you talking about AMP?

mobile Q&A results slide-down-widget thingy is the most egregious imho

ooh the widget content. wow that’s huge, most google results have some kind of widget content be it q&a results or images or even key excerpts. never really thought that it’s reducing a lot of page views but with enough of those little widgets it probably adds up. If you’re getting what you’re looking for right on the results page then why click on a link?

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

#824

Post by golem14 »

zaarn wrote: post #523
dmix wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> German courts at least agree that for such things This implies that you are going to have to go to court because you got an email at 1am and didn't reply right away...in order to fight off potentially serious fines. Whether it's accurate or not it's still very expensive to prove it's inaccuracy (in time alone, not including financially and stress). This has very serious consequences for small and even medium busine…

>This implies that you are going to have to go to court No it doesn't, it means that if you get dragged to court because you got the email at 1AM and you were asleep, then you're not guilty of anything. No judge will put up a fine for that.

You might still get a letter from some law office to tell you about the violation and a hefty bill for providing this service. I suggest familiarizing yourself with the concept of "abmahnung" in Germany. Quite a racket.

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

#825

Post by atmosx »

tomelders wrote: post #809
gnusci wrote: post #797

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My 5c here. Maybe they just don't have much to do, so they need to justify their salaries, and they need to have some presence in the WWW to let us know that they are out there.

Hmmm. I'm not so sure. The EU parliament is usually pretty savvy on civil rights and freedom issues like this. I'm genuinely surprised that this law passed. However, it's hard to fathom the EU parliament sometimes because it's such a broad and diverse bunch of people and interests forced into such a small political space. If someone asked me to play devils advocate for this decision, I'd probably appeal to people's f…

> I'd then go on to argue that information can and must be free to share, but nefarious misinformation should not be free from punishment nor protected by law.

I'd argue that 80% of statements made by political actors are about spreading misinformation (or fake news), misinterpreted (misreading latest wikileaks reports) or deliberate lies to drive a point home (immigrants are driving the UK economy down!). For example when the US reps states "we found nuclear guns in Iraq" is it a valid statement or nefarious misinformation. Does prior experience by an actor amount for anything? Who gets to decide?

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

#826

Post by BryanBigs »

nostrademons wrote: post #738
ivanhoe wrote: post #682

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, radio stations don't earn a lot either, but still have to pay licence fees for the music they play. Perhaps some sort of flat fee paid based on some statistics how much content has been shared from which source would make sense. It will not be a huge money, but it's still better than no money at all. Aggregators/ search engines need the content produced at the volume, otherwise they'll be out of business too at…

80% of radio stations in the U.S. are owned by one company (iHeartMedia, formerly ClearChannel), and despite this monopoly negotiating power, the company is still operating out of Chapter 11 bankruptcy with a $20B debt load.

If I remember correctly, they built most of that debt load buying up all those stations. Rado stations aren't money losers. Loading up leverage to 12x cash flow on junk debt to buy stations, on the other hand...

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

#827

Post by godzillabrennus »

HIPisTheAnswer wrote: post #815
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…

> The only thing this will do is entrench massive players like Google and Facebook Incorrect. It will also speed up development of a new web which is impossible to regulate. So I rejoice. When they block entire services for days, I cry in joy. A 10 days blackout is what we need...

Pied Piper.

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

#828

Post by anigbrowl »

TylerE wrote: post #816
anigbrowl wrote: post #786

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's essentially a religious argument. Please provide evidence for your claim.

Corporations exist

That's not much of an argument. Have a nice day.

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

#829

Post by anigbrowl »

camgunz wrote: post #821
anigbrowl wrote: post #784

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine all the time wasted on those modal dialogs and add up the total cost in human lives. GMAFB, nobody is dying because they're being asked to consent or refuse cookie tracking. If you are worried about that then why haven't I see you complaining about the modal dialogs and umpteen other other impositions inflicted upon users by marketing departments?

My main objection to it is that it doesn't at all solve the problem. Everyone clicks "accept", people still don't know what cookies (etc.) are, it was yet another silly regulation that harms small players and entrenches megacorps, and overall makes the internet less fun and more corporate junk. Real regulations about this stuff require real technical expertise, and it's going to be at least a generation before that e…

Sorry, that argument begs the question. I am well aware of what cookies are and think about the content of what I'm agreeing to, and often decline invitations from sites I don't trust. You're assuming that's what is convenient for one party in the transaction must be optimal for all parties, which is irrational.

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

#830

Post by anigbrowl »

steamer25 wrote: post #790
anigbrowl wrote: post #784

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine all the time wasted on those modal dialogs and add up the total cost in human lives. GMAFB, nobody is dying because they're being asked to consent or refuse cookie tracking. If you are worried about that then why haven't I see you complaining about the modal dialogs and umpteen other other impositions inflicted upon users by marketing departments?

I think jules means to consider how many millions of dollars and euros and hours and hours were spent developing the modals for thousands of different websites and how that money might have been better spent.

Perhaps, but you could say the same about 99% of marketing appeals, which are far more profuse, and many of which are actively deceptive.
Post reply on HN