Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Copyright law could put end to net memes

EU Internet censorship meme memes European Union

  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#41
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,218 posts

 

 

It's like a blatant buy-out of the European internet by American megacorporations.

 

 

It is also:

  1. A blow to freedom of the press.
  2. Idiotic - how is it to be enforced?  What if I type some original composition and forget to correctly cite a source for some clause in my writing? What if by sheer coincidence my opinion happens to bear a match to that of another person? How accurate are these "algorithim" checks in that regard? Can these filtering mechanisms also not be used to delete anything "controversial" with no recourse to appeal by sincere posters and web site managers? 
  3. Threatens to basically defeat the purpose of the internet, which is to spread ideas and encourage discourse on the problems of the day.

 

That is what I come up with for starters.  I suspect further thought would result in further objections.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#42
starspawn0

starspawn0

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 894 posts

Copyright is also damaging to the transmission of culture.  I find myself sometimes looking for a movie clip on the internet to make a point, only to find it had been scrubbed due to copyright violation.  So, I can only desceibe it in words.

 

....

 

On another point, the U.S. needs a public, high-speed wireless internet.  As I recall, some cities have tried to produce them, but get attacked by major service providers.

 

One of the times I was in England, Bristol had such a service; and then I think they had removed it the next time I visited -- but maybe I didn't look hard enough. 

 

I forget whether London ever had such a service.  I had visited London several times, but don't remember checking.  

 

Nor do I remember for the other cities I've visited in the rest of Europe.


  • Yuli Ban likes this

#43
kjaggard

kjaggard

    Artificer

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,964 posts
  • Locationwhere fanciful imaginings and hard won knowledge meet to genesis the future.

as an online content creator who tries to keep up with the ins and out of my chosen field I can tell you that copyright violations are ripe for abuse. There is a recent example of I think it's Vox media who published a video about building a computer that would pretty much assure you would fry all the components. and some other youtubers provided warnings and correction to the content in the form of original videos with clips of the Vox video in question. Vox struck out with copyright strikes in a situation that is undeniably fair use. Meanwhile Vox reports on internet and celebrity culture by using images and video and audio clips gathered online without getting permission of the subjects or the original source of the media they use.

 

Meanwhile some youtubers have been copyright struck for their own voice (in some cases because somebody used a clip or interview of them saying something and then the creator makes a similar comment in their own channel, and they get hit for duplicating.

 

In general just youtube search copyright strike and look long and hard at the future of the internet.

 

How will they enforce it... They won't they will just make Youtube or other services criminally libel for 'copyright issues' and it's the companys problem to figure out how to make sure it doesn't happen. And since they can't stop it without shutting everyone out and only allowing people to post things with a sort of broadcast permit that can be revoked for misconduct, and decreasing the content traffic to 57 channels with staff watching the content full time for anything out of line...

 

welcome to laws made by people that have no understanding what they are doing, but are well informed about what to do by the companies that fund the campaign financing that gets them into office.


  • Erowind likes this
Live content within small means. Seek elegance rather than luxury, Grace over fashion and wealth over riches.
Listen to clouds and mountains, children and sages. Act bravely, think boldly.
Await occasions, never make haste. Find wonder and awe, by experiencing the everyday.

#44
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,218 posts

 

 

 

It's like a blatant buy-out of the European internet by American megacorporations.

 

It is also:

  1. A blow to freedom of the press.
  2. Idiotic ....
  3. Threatens to basically defeat the purpose of the internet, which is to spread ideas and encourage discourse on the problems of the day.

 

I just thought that it would probably have been better to have presented these points in the form of a set of questions rather than declarative arguments. That is that I have have questions as follows:

 

  1. Will the legislation in question be a blow to freedom of the press?
  2. Is it idiotic? (WIth further questions as stated in the post from which I extracted the quoted comments).
  3. Will it defeat the basic purpose of the internet?

It is not that I am totally opposed to the idea of intellectual property rights.  It is just that I have concerns along the lines expressed by kjagaard in the above post.  I don't have a clear enough understanding of the legislation or the algorithm based technology in question to come to firm conclusions. I do have concerns, especially as these European laws might come to be emulated in the United States.

 

I also wonder, how does this potentially affect out of country postings that happen to be transmitted via the internet?  Would the laws give corporations undue legal recourse through international courts to extend the mischief caused by these laws? 


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#45
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,246 posts
  • LocationLondon

 

(Laughing) Oh my god, it's even worse than anyone could have imagined!
 

The Final Version of the EU's Copyright Directive Is the Worst One Yet

Despite ringing denunciations from small EU tech businessesgiant EU entertainment companiesartists' groupstechnical experts, and human rights experts, and the largest body of concerned citizens in EU history, the EU has concluded its "trilogues" on the new Copyright Directive, striking a deal that—amazingly—is worse than any in the Directive's sordid history.
Under the final text, any online community, platform or service that has existed for three or more years, or is making €10,000,001/year or more, is responsible for ensuring that no user ever posts anything that infringes copyright, even momentarily. This is impossible, and the closest any service can come to it is spending hundreds of millions of euros to develop automated copyright filters. Those filters will subject all communications of every European to interception and arbitrary censorship if a black-box algorithm decides their text, pictures, sounds or videos are a match for a known copyrighted work. They are a gift to fraudsters and criminals, to say nothing of censors, both government and private.
These filters are unaffordable by all but the largest tech companies, all based in the USA, and the only way Europe's homegrown tech sector can avoid the obligation to deploy them is to stay under ten million euros per year in revenue, and also shut down after three years.


It's like a blatant buy-out of the European internet by American megacorporations.

 

Article 11, which allows news sites to decide who can link to their stories and charge for permission to do so, has also been worsened. The final text clarifies that any link that contains more than "single words or very short extracts" from a news story must be licensed, with no exceptions for noncommercial users, nonprofit projects, or even personal websites with ads or other income sources, no matter how small.

 

 

 

Absolutely horrific. This would literally kill vast swathes of the Internet. I can't believe this will pass, it's simply absurd.



#46
Jakob

Jakob

    Groveling Goblin

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,090 posts

Well that's socialism for you. The internet is very censored in places like China and North Korea. Aren't you glad Britain is exiting the socialist EU so they will no longer be required to censor everything? Not that the UK has any free speech anyway.



#47
rennerpetey

rennerpetey

    Fighting Corporations since 2020

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 553 posts
  • LocationNot in Kansas anymore

Well that's socialism for you. The internet is very censored in places like China and North Korea. Aren't you glad Britain is exiting the socialist EU so they will no longer be required to censor everything? Not that the UK has any free speech anyway.

You may or may not be trolling, but to clarify for anyone who genuinely agrees with this sentiment, the bill is being pushed by corporations and capitalism.  Under socialism, copyright laws would be much weaker or eradicated all together.


John Lennon dares you to make sense of this

Spoiler

#48
Sciencerocks

Sciencerocks

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,308 posts

I'd gut copy right for digital "data" as the entire idea of copy right was made for things you can hold in your hand.

 

Imagine the fascism that can be brought down on the people if we do not.



#49
Sciencerocks

Sciencerocks

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,308 posts

 

Well that's socialism for you. The internet is very censored in places like China and North Korea. Aren't you glad Britain is exiting the socialist EU so they will no longer be required to censor everything? Not that the UK has any free speech anyway.

You may or may not be trolling, but to clarify for anyone who genuinely agrees with this sentiment, the bill is being pushed by corporations and capitalism.  Under socialism, copyright laws would be much weaker or eradicated all together.

 

I believe you do have a point. The rich want to control everything and statist capitalist which are fascist will do exactly that. I believe you have a point as pure communism is kind of like liberterianism as it does away with government and puts everything in the public domain.



#50
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,246 posts
  • LocationLondon

 

I'd gut copy right for digital "data" as the entire idea of copy right was made for things you can hold in your hand.

 

That would mean anybody could copy and paste the entire FutureTimeline website into a new domain and make profit from that copy. No thanks.



#51
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,246 posts
  • LocationLondon

Parliament reaches agreement on copyright deal

 

https://youtu.be/yVefHBsvubg



#52
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,246 posts
  • LocationLondon
European Wikipedias have been turned off for the day to protest dangerous copyright laws
 
Mar 21, 2019
 
Websites and businesses across Europe today are protesting controversial changes to online copyright being introduced by the European Union.
 
Ahead of a final vote on the legislation next Tuesday, March 26th, a number of European Wikipedia sites are going dark for the day, blocking all access and directing users to contact their local EU representative to protest the laws.
 
 
 
IMfcTK7.jpg

  • Yuli Ban likes this

#53
kjaggard

kjaggard

    Artificer

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,964 posts
  • Locationwhere fanciful imaginings and hard won knowledge meet to genesis the future.

while staying at a 'hostel' in Oahu, I chatted with an Austrian girl and ask about her thoughts about the impending implosion of european internet because of this... she had never even heard about this.

 

WTF? How secret is all this going down? is this one of those things we know about because we live within the spheres that are highly impacted by this to a degree that we see it as wide open? while the vast majority of others are completely unaware of it?


Live content within small means. Seek elegance rather than luxury, Grace over fashion and wealth over riches.
Listen to clouds and mountains, children and sages. Act bravely, think boldly.
Await occasions, never make haste. Find wonder and awe, by experiencing the everyday.

#54
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,415 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA

The European Parliament has voted in favour of Article 13

European politicians have voted to pass Article 13 and Article 11 as part of sweeping changes to regulation around online copyright. The European Parliament passed the legislation by 348 votes to 274.
Opponents had hoped for last-minute amendments to be made to the legislation, but failed to garner enough votes. Julia Reda, a German MEP representing the Pirate Party who opposes the copyright directive, said it was a “dark day for internet freedom”. Margrethe Vestager, European Commissioner for Competition, said the result was “great news”.

A vote on debating amendments – including an amendment to remove Article 13 and the Article 11 ‘link tax’ from the broader copyright legislation – was rejected by just five votes. EU member states now have two years to pass their own laws that put the Copyright Directive into effect.
Rapporteur Axel Voss, a member of the Christian Democratic Union of Germany, said the directive was “an important step towards correcting a situation which has allowed a few companies to earn huge sums of money without properly remunerating the thousands of creatives and journalists whose work they depend on”.

If Brexit weren't being done for the sake of disaster capitalists to fatten their coffers, I'd say "Thank god the UK is leaving this corporate mess."


  • Sciencerocks and Enda Kurina like this

And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#55
kjaggard

kjaggard

    Artificer

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,964 posts
  • Locationwhere fanciful imaginings and hard won knowledge meet to genesis the future.

my instinct in this case would to be troll the law all the way. A news channel has a street interview where they have a sign of a business in the shot? get it flagged for violating the law. Government reference a research study in discussion? flag them for not providing proof of permission to use the study from those that conducted it and the brands and companies referred to in it.

 

Flag Flag Flag. Bring everything to a screetching halt in the first week of the law with all the internet trolls and activists. Make them have no choice but to roll it back.


Live content within small means. Seek elegance rather than luxury, Grace over fashion and wealth over riches.
Listen to clouds and mountains, children and sages. Act bravely, think boldly.
Await occasions, never make haste. Find wonder and awe, by experiencing the everyday.

#56
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,246 posts
  • LocationLondon

Well here's the EU's press release. It seems they toned down the most controversial aspects.

 

http://www.europarl....or-the-internet

 

• Internet platforms are liable for content that users upload
 
Some uploaded material, such as memes or GIFs, now specifically excluded from directive
 
Hyperlinks to news articles, accompanied by “individual words or very short extracts”, can be shared freely
 
• Journalists must get a share of any copyright-related revenue obtained by their news publisher
 
• Start-up platforms subject to lighter obligations
 
[...]
 
"Uploading protected works for quotation, criticism, review, caricature, parody or pastiche has been protected even more than it was before."

  • Alislaws likes this

#57
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,883 posts
  • LocationLondon

wait so... crisis averted?







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: EU, Internet, censorship, meme, memes, European Union

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users