Responses
Ikr I signed the article 13 petition in hopes of it getting abolished. You should sign it too!!
TrumP is NoT a ReTaRD, Wut you talkin bout???
That's right.
Pay the goddamn wall then.
On 12 September 2018, all 751 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) got a chance to shape the European copyright reform with a plenary vote.
The outcome: 366 MEPs blatantly ignored your calls asking them to #SaveYourInternet, as they adopted the copyright #CensorshipMachine.
What’s next: The JURI Committee Rapporteur, MEP Axel Voss, has been granted a mandate to start informal negations with the representatives of the EU Member States (Council) and the European Commission (EC), so-called ‘trilogue negotiations’, the black box in the EU policymaking process. See EDRi’s explainer for more details on the remainder of this process.
*Article 13 only benefits big businesses*
Due to the collateral damage created by the vague and overly broad wording of Article 13, only big platforms and powerful rightholders will benefit from its adoption, to the detriment of all other stakeholders.
*Bad for Users*
Users will have access to less content and will be unable to share their content with others, even when it’s legal. Moreover, any complaint mechanisms will be easily bypassed if blocking is done under the pretense of a terms and conditions violation, rather than as a result of a specific copyright claim.
*Bad for Creators*
If platforms become directly liable for user uploaded content they will arbitrarily remove content based on their terms and conditions. As a result, many creators will see their content get blocked too. And, as less platforms survive the burden of this provision, creators will have less choice on where to share their creations.
*Bad for competition*
Only platforms with deep pockets will be able to comply with the Article 13 requirements and even if small enterprises get an exemption from its scope, this simply means they are not allowed to scale up and compete with the big US platforms, under the motto ‘in Europe, small is beautiful’!
What’s at Stake?
#1 Making Platform primarily liable leads to filtering, even when filtering is not mentionned
Article 13’s various versions creates a system whereby platforms face an increased (direct) liability for the content uploaded by their users if it infringes copyright. As a result, these platforms are likely to overblock even legal content and use automated techniques to avoid being sued, which will mean users will no longer be able to share and experience the content they were used to find online.
Our Ability To Post Content On The Internet Will Be Limited By A Censorship Machine
Some of the content uploaded on the Internet infringes the copyright of rightholders (which are often not the content creators but intermediaries and investors such as recording or film studios) and content creators complain that due to the digital evolution, they make less money than they used to (the so-called ‘value gap’). This does not reflect the reality accurately, specifically in the case of the music industry that year after year announce that their incomes keep increasing. However, what they claim is that some platforms (YouTube, Vimeo… ) do not pay them enough when they stream copyrighted content: that is what they call the “value gap” (the gap between what rightsholders think would be fair as a compensation and what platforms pay them).
Article 13 claims to address these problems but does so it in a way that hampers the way the Internet has been functioning so far by asking platforms to put in place costly and opaque solutions to pre-screen our content. This proposal would require intermediaries such as Facebook and YouTube to constantly police their platforms with censorship machines, often with no human element involved in the process. It will mean that you will no longer be able to upload or enjoy the same content as you used to, as automated blocking is likely to stop (legitimate) content of ever making it online. Analyses by EDRi of the European Commission and JURI proposals show the underlying threats in Article 13’s logic.
And what’s worse: none of the versions of Article 13 make life better for creators. Article 13 actually makes no mention of creators: only rightholders.
#2 This affects much more than YouTube and Facebook …which already comply with Article 13
#3 Article 13 results in the Outsourcing of Legal judgments
https://saveyourinternet.eu/