Live data from Hacker News

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

theverge.com

911–920 of 1001 posts

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

#911

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should Google continue to refer traffic to these sites for free without compensation?

Euh... Google makes billions of dollars referring traffic...

As do the pages. All this has been tested before in Germany with the Leistungsschutzrecht. Even before it was struck down by the courts it was more or less not active anymore. Google just stopped sending traffic to the pages of the German publishers. It took only a few days until Axel Springer & Co. came crawling back and made a deal with Google that they are allowed to link without compensation.

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

#912

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously that's impossible and it'll be easier to just not have comments, which is exactly what websites will do, and exactly what the EU wants. The EU is sick and tired of people sharing their opinions and pointing out how stupid and draconian and bereaucratic the EU can be, so they did this to shut it all down under the guise of protecting copyright or somesuch.

>The EU is sick and tired of people sharing their opinions Why the EU specifically ? I'd say, most states and groups of states have this attitude nowadays.

Is it perhaps possible that this comment is about the EU specifically because the EU specifically is the subject of this particular conversation? After all, this is about a law the EU specifically is choosing to pursue, rather than some broader worldwide trend.

Commenting narrowly on just the EU implies nothing, in any way, shape, form, or manner, about other entities.

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

#913

As bonkers as this may seem, I suspect it will fall flat on it's face the second it's put before a court. For example, someone defends their right to use the title or quote from an article from some other news gathering organisation. Someone will need to convince a judge that it's OK for The Sunday Times, or Der Spiegel to do that, but it's not OK for Reddit or Hacker News to do that. And eventually, someone will nee…

> However, if this law is upheld in court, then I think we can consider the EU a failed experiment What an unexpected conclusion you are jumping into. I think EU is the only capable authority in the world so far who is not afraid to challenge big corporations in favour of people. (mobile charges, customer rights, Google, Intel, Telefonica, etc..) I completely agree that there are big problems around EU when it comes…

Any country that legislates against free speech ans freedom of expression with such a brutal and blunt law such as this should be considered a failed experiment.

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

#914
post #850

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that the power grant to Congress to establish copyright was in the original Constitution, while freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment, which - as the name says - is an amendment , which, by definition, changes the existing powers. The legal argument for that, rather, is that all rights are implicitly limited, and that, depending on how important the right in question is, how small the limitation…

The meaning of free speech has changed dramatically over the past century. This is why things can seem so contradictory. Like so much of Anglo-American law, Free Speech and Freedom of the Press is an application of the fundamental concept of Due Process of law. One facet of Due Process says that the government cannot single out individuals, groups, or specific types of behaviors unless there's a compelling reason and…

I'm curious about "boots & suspenders", searching for that gives a lot of porn results! Is this really an idiom in the US, or should it be "belt & braces"? (braces are what you call suspenders, what we call suspenders is the waist garment that secures stockings for the ladies)

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

#915

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US has a huge surveillance (both govt and private) problem, but censorship? Can you give some examples?

1. Reddit on the topic of Donald Trump is an example. 2. Forcing social media firms to delete specific kinds of content is another (albeit controversial) example. 3. Redacting all info about Saudi involvement in the 9-11 reports is a great example of censorship under the pretext of national security. 4. The SESTA/FOSTA bills are a recent (but again somewhat controversial) example. 5. Plenty of movies have been censor…

Classifying government documents is not censorship, since it's not government suppressing anyone's speech. It's strictly a transparency issue.

All of your other examples involve private censorship (which can be rephrased as "people and companies exercising their property rights and freedom of association"), not government censorship.

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

#916
post #856

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stronger they push ridiculous laws like this the more it will force perfectly legitimate business to go underground. We will end up with all the problems of prohibition all over again. > is intended to give publishers and papers a way to make money when companies like Google link to their stories So Google should pay you when they send you more traffic? More traffic = more money. Most companies would be overjoyed…

Why should Google be able to profit off of others content without compensating them? Compulsory licenses are standard in the music industry, and in theory the same could work well for journalism. But the devil is in the details.

If a website doesn't want its content to be summarized by Google couldn't they just block it in their robots.txt? From what I've seen that results in Google listing the page's title but with no description.

Maybe search engines could adopt some sort of standard that would allow pages to provide their desired description using meta tags if they don't want an automated summary. I could see a problem with pages using dishonest summaries, but perhaps that could be addressed by penalizing the page rank if the provided summary is too different than the summary that Google would have generated.

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

#917
post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The entire point of art. 11 is to transfer money from Google News (and other aggregators, like Facebook) to publishers. The latest version of Google News has already solved this: it only shows the title and the image, not a single sentence from the article itself, – which was the main concern in Spain and Germany when the relevant laws were introduced. Facebook and Twitter shouldn't face any issues as well, because…

Sadly I still can't access Google News (in the normal way) from Spain though. The notice that it's closed due to the law is still there.

This is what you get if you try to access Google News from Spain, for those curious.

https://support.google.com/news/answer/6140047?hl=es

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

#918
post #899

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do have free speech in the EU, claming otherwise would indicate that the European countries are no democracies. While the extent of free speech might vary from country to country, denying it is there goes way to far. Sure, there are limitations to it, e.g. denying the Holocaust or using Nazi symbols in Germany, and with regards to defamation. But otherwise just about any opinion can be voiced freely. Thid doesn't…

What you are describing is a merged set of other named rights, such as Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Association, etc. The US (as far as I am aware) is the only country in the world with the Right to Free Speech. Free being the keyword here, "unconstrained". Free Speech doesn't mean having the right to say bad things about the government. It means having the right to say anything you want.

Well, at least in Germany you can say all kinds of negative Things aboiut the government you want as long as you are not personally insulting anybody. In France as well as far as I know. Wether it is part of freedom of Speech or Freedom of Expression, well I'm no constitutional lawyer.

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

#919
post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>because a majority either doesn't agree with you or doesn't care enough to bother. // That's why we've not moved on from representative democracy. The problem is the representatives are supposed to represent the people - and the people think they do (or try) - but in practice the representatives often don't. In the UK we very rarely get chance to influence decisions, instead we get to choose the people who will deci…

I think the easily solution (for the EU) would be the better advertise the fact they have MEPs and that you vote for them. EU elections have a rather disappointingly low participation, it's no wonder that things get lobbied into existence. Representative democracy is IMO the most effective form of democracy for large scale hierarchies of authority, at least if you want something democratic. (There is always the optio…

I think I agree per representative democracy, it's the best of the options that we practically have.

But, it relies on honest, forthright representatives and the people who covertly back most of those representatives are getting better at lying and presenting a fake reality.

This breaks democracy.

We need laws like they have for financial adverts on the radio, so when the drugs minister speaks about illegal drugs she has to say "my husband owns the largest cannabis producing company in the UK, and I personally profit from sale of cannabis products due to their health uses; but despite this cannabis growing will remain illegal here, I benefit financially from that".

That's not an isolated example, all the Tories appear to have other interests above their constituents. PM May's husband profits from companies seeking to avoid UK tax, he also presumably has insider information; the chances of May making a decision that negatively impacts her husband's interest in a reportedly £1.4 Trillion are probably infinitesimal -- regardless of whether that benefits the country and/or her constituents.

Before every party political broadcast they need a list of the manifesto promises they made for the last election, and whether they met them. Remind us to look most carefully at who we choose to represent our interests.

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

#920
post #629
post #181

For the anecdote, Nils Torvalds, the father of Linus, is one of the many authors of this text law. I'm from EU, I had the time to look at the recent amendments about this law, in which they added precisions about the fair use of data, for non-profit and public research. They also precised that this law and the technical implementations should not go against already in-place freedom of speech rights. Hopefully, people…

Note that Nils Torvalds voted against the directive today. My source is the Finnish tech magazine Mikrobitti [1] which gives a link to the vote results [2, p.38]. I'm sure someone will eventually post a more readable list of who voted what. [1] https://www.mikrobitti.fi/uutiset/mb/4a70c290-cc01-4789-b0e2... [2] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2f...

A good source for votes is votewatch.eu (free account registration required) - their site is a bit slow, but it does let you slice and dice the vote totals in all kinds of interesting ways.

For the specific breakdown of the Digital Single Market vote, see http://www.votewatch.eu/en/term8-copyright-in-the-digital-si...

Post reply on HN