TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

EU copyright law proposal rejected

1847 pointsby iMerNiboralmost 7 years ago

33 comments

squarefootalmost 7 years ago
It is extremely important not to lose focus on the problem because they&#x27;re going to try again and again to pass it, one way or another. They&#x27;ll never stop: it&#x27;s about profit both for the corporations bribing for those laws and the politicians being bribed to push for them, so they&#x27;ll just keep pushing until they find the right weapon of mass distraction to keep the public attention away.<p>Also it is important to keep in mind the old tricks used to pass bad laws: they push initially for worse laws then after public protest they slowly step back to the initial goal to pretend people were listened to, so that not only they get what they wanted, but the public is also being fooled into believing their protest were successful and they have politicians who actually listen to them. How lucky!
评论 #17466189 未加载
评论 #17469714 未加载
评论 #17466010 未加载
评论 #17466175 未加载
评论 #17463944 未加载
评论 #17467253 未加载
评论 #17466406 未加载
评论 #17466414 未加载
评论 #17463555 未加载
评论 #17464103 未加载
评论 #17464831 未加载
评论 #17466130 未加载
评论 #17463127 未加载
izacusalmost 7 years ago
This battle is nowhere near over, copyright holders are constantly bribing and pushing towards more and more draconian laws to keep competition out and maximize profits.<p>Having said that, it&#x27;s good to see EU didn&#x27;t sell us out at the first chance.
评论 #17462436 未加载
评论 #17462368 未加载
akuji1993almost 7 years ago
The good thing also is, that the Worldcup will be over when the law is discussed again. You can spot pretty easily how laws like this are always pushed in a time where most people are occupied with something else, usually around summer. It&#x27;s ridiculous how often that happens. Let&#x27;s hope we don&#x27;t have a big distraction coming up in September.
评论 #17462216 未加载
评论 #17462169 未加载
评论 #17462377 未加载
评论 #17462227 未加载
评论 #17462123 未加载
dalbasalalmost 7 years ago
I am always impressed by the support efforts to curb copyright expansion, as it relates to practical freedoms of expression, information and control over the internet. It&#x27;s a nuanced issue, international and unrelated directly to any major political wing or ideology. So, the fact that it attracts a dedicated and effective activist base is both surprising and heartening. This for the &quot;cause&quot; least likely to get you laid.<p>Thank you to whoever is involved. You are fighting for <i>me</i> and I appreciate it. I&#x27;m going to make a habit of writing MEPs and generally getting behind you guys. I want my next comment on the subject to be in the first person (we).<p>But.....<p>I feel like <i>we&#x27;re</i> at a real structural disadvantage. Copyrights (up generally) are under constant expansive efforts. Expanding rights. Expanding duratii. Expanding enforcement. Practical enforcement edforts that will result in dragnets (like this, now defeated proposal).<p>The saintly activists are working to defeat restrictions, but they can&#x27;t win every fight. This proposal will be back, in modified form. It&#x27;s a ratchet. Sometimes we don&#x27;t lose. Other times we lose. There are no wins, just defense against loss.<p>For a practical example: YouTube is the biggest video site, and it does not honour fair use. You can&#x27;t (easily, anyway) automate fair use detection, so it gets caught in the copyright violation dragnets. In practice this weakens fair use rights. I&#x27;m sure pressure from copyright holders played a role on YouTube&#x27;s policy decisions.<p>Is there (or can there be) an activist effort that puts pressure on YouTube (just for example) to protect fair use rights, and freedom of expression generally.<p>Are there wins we can aim for? Is an effort to shorten copyright duration feasible? I think the economic argument is on our side, even if we accept the other side&#x27;s premises. Is a fair use expansion campaign possible?
评论 #17466084 未加载
评论 #17465434 未加载
6ue7nNMEEbHcMalmost 7 years ago
If you&#x27;d ask me personally I think Article 15 is far worse than Article 13. Computer programs are also copyrighted so this would make really hard time for anyone trying to maintain the business once it grows. If this is passed (if I understand this correctly) a subcontractor could sue you for extra money you gained on some of his contributions. It&#x27;s like contracts no longer define how much you owe to people because everything may change if you succeed. How do you reinvest the money in such conditions? Do you hold some cash just in case someone pops up demanding more money?
评论 #17462877 未加载
评论 #17465216 未加载
评论 #17466402 未加载
评论 #17462811 未加载
derrizalmost 7 years ago
I have to say (and I am not a fan of modern copyright law at all) that I&#x27;m undecided about this law.<p>I guess the contrarian in me requires more analysis and reasoning than I&#x27;ve found in the top google search results or following some of the links posted here on Hacker News. In fact I&#x27;m aware that I often take positions based on disliking the presentation of arguments and this is a personal flaw.<p>But I have to say most of the pieces I read rub me up the wrong way by seemingly just repeating arguments from authority or presenting interpretations without any logical reasoning built on primary sources (i.e. the text of the directive).<p>Many of the pieces, even by respected sources, seem very click-baity where it seems there is competition to come up with the most apocalyptic claims. The directive will lead to the end of the internet itself seems to be the bar.<p>When I finally found a piece which actually quoted text from article 13, for example, it didn&#x27;t seem to explicitly support many of the claims. Is there a mandate or even reference to upload filters in the text of the article? Does it reference memes at all? I&#x27;m happy to be correct if there is. But if there isn&#x27;t, I don&#x27;t see an obvious path from the primary text to these sort of claims.<p>The actual text of the article that I&#x27;ve seen quoted seems to simply codify the status quo that currently exists in nearly all countries. Which is that content aggregators are oblidged to cooperate with copyright holders to block copyright infringement. Google, youtube, eBay, etc., etc. have been doing this for years without &quot;killing the internet&quot;. Don&#x27;t all countries with copyright laws already provide legal mechanisms for holder to force content aggregators to remove infringing material?<p>If that&#x27;s the case, then this is simply a typical EU directive - which just represents some sort of minimum standard based on the existing laws in the 28 countries.<p>As I said, I&#x27;m happy to be corrected if someone can provide an argument based on the text. Please reply with links or references instead of down voting :)
评论 #17462453 未加载
评论 #17462840 未加载
评论 #17462929 未加载
评论 #17462681 未加载
评论 #17463479 未加载
评论 #17465430 未加载
评论 #17464328 未加载
评论 #17462553 未加载
laumarsalmost 7 years ago
The vote was worryingly close though:<p><pre><code> In favour: 278 Against: 318 </code></pre> The pessimist in me can&#x27;t see this getting rejected a second time :(
评论 #17462197 未加载
评论 #17463071 未加载
评论 #17462474 未加载
评论 #17462530 未加载
评论 #17466251 未加载
评论 #17462381 未加载
whizzkidalmost 7 years ago
I think that current implementations of update filters are not ready and satisfactory to make internet a better place, thus I am glad that it is rejected for now.<p>When youtube content id matches 10 seconds of black screen as a copyrighted material, it shows that these systems are nowhere near production ready.<p>I am all for fair use and credits when it comes to creators getting paid for what they deserve but, when you need couple of lawyers to dispute something as a student on internet against enterprises, then freedom and equality of Internet disappears.
评论 #17462285 未加载
asbalmost 7 years ago
Interesting how The Guardian are choosing to report this: &quot;YouTube and Facebook could escape billions in copyright payouts after EU vote&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;technology&#x2F;2018&#x2F;jul&#x2F;05&#x2F;youtube-could-escape-billions-in-copyright-payouts-after-eu-vote" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;technology&#x2F;2018&#x2F;jul&#x2F;05&#x2F;youtube-c...</a>
评论 #17462862 未加载
stakhanovalmost 7 years ago
...listening to BBC Radio 6 today, I was pretty shocked about how they only portrayed it in a positive light. Their spin was that it&#x27;s all about making sure YouTube can no longer pretend they&#x27;re not benefitting from copyrighted material being uploaded illegally, and how Paul McCartney thinks that&#x27;s a great thing for artists.
评论 #17462873 未加载
评论 #17462466 未加载
christkvalmost 7 years ago
The only long term solution is to create law that scuttles these kinds of articles in the future. When you play on the defensive you are leaving the definition power to the copyright lobby.
评论 #17462255 未加载
azernikalmost 7 years ago
For those who want to see detailed breakdowns (by European party grouping, by national party, by country, etc.) see <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.votewatch.eu&#x2F;en&#x2F;term8-copyright-in-the-digital-single-market-draft-legislative-resolution-vote-decision-to-enter-into-inte.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.votewatch.eu&#x2F;en&#x2F;term8-copyright-in-the-digital-si...</a> (note - you&#x27;ll need to create a login).<p>Interesting takeaways:<p>1. As is usual, party discipline was very strong on the national-party level, but usually weak on the level of the European political grouping.<p>2. The center-right EPP grouping voted by a large majority for the regulation.<p>3. There was a very strong national divide between France (&gt;80% in favor) and every other large state (small majorities against).<p>4. Party discipline on the European level among the Socialists (S&amp;D) broke down completely, leaving them split about 50&#x2F;50. For example, German SPD voted unanimously against; the French, British, Italian, and Spanish socialists by large majorities in favor; and most of the socialists from small states voted against.<p>5. The liberals (in the European, FDP sense), were split <i>within</i> parties at a high rate.<p>6. The nationalist far-right (the French party formerly known as the Front National, Lega Nord, etc.) and the Eurosceptic right (e.g. UK Conservatives, the governing Polish PiS, etc.), which usually vote similarly, split along national-party lines.
pasbesoinalmost 7 years ago
They&#x27;ll never stop.<p>And, they&#x27;re using your own money against you. Sales revenue, all the higher and more profitable as they tighten their control.<p>Your tax dollars. Here in the U.S., there is an ongoing conversation about the continued efforts to &quot;criminalize&quot; IP infringement. Not only do the &quot;big players&quot; already have the advantage in terms of the ability to pay -- potentially endlessly -- for attorneys. They are trying to get the government, with its deep pockets and salaried attorneys, to take over prosecution of civil law infringements.<p>Which also means less government attention to crime that may actually concern you, its citizens, more.<p>Now, if the world were getting better, one might debate whether these are useful changes. Instead, it seems most people who take the time to understand this, and who aren&#x27;t benefiting from tacking on another 20 years to Micky Mouse&#x27;s exclusivity, find the changes both absurd and a hindrance to real productivity and creativity.<p>Workers in the U.S. have had to compete not only against lower wages, but also against lower costs of producers who don&#x27;t respect and pay for the IP they use. Some of the same companies that scream bloody murder about infringement in the U.S., turn around and use those producers abroad because of their lower costs.<p>They&#x27;re using your own money against you.<p>(And, I&#x27;ve got nothing against the rest of the world catching up. I do resent and oppose the arbitrage practiced by such entities, in combination with convenient legal and political collusion, to greatly enrich themselves while perhaps even impeding real progress.)<p>P.S. Regarding the &quot;tricks&quot; used to escalate their control, mentioned by the parent commenter. One of those is the current proliferation of &quot;trade agreements&quot;. One member is convinced, bribed, coerced to increase an IP &quot;right&quot;. The trade agreement includes an automatic mechanism for &quot;harmonization&quot; between members. The other member states use said &quot;harmonization&quot; as the cause that increases that right in their own state.<p>People living in the latter may never have agreed to e.g. another extension to length of copyright. But suddenly they have it, via &quot;harmonization&quot;. And politicians saying, &quot;The treaty made us do it.&quot;<p>This has all been discussed before, on the Web. But I haven&#x27;t seen it surface prominently, in a while, and it bears repeating for those who are just becoming familiar with the issue.
评论 #17465713 未加载
sampoalmost 7 years ago
Here is how different countries voted: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;europe&#x2F;comments&#x2F;8wbbsy&#x2F;analysis_of_the_copyright_vote_per_country&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;europe&#x2F;comments&#x2F;8wbbsy&#x2F;analysis_of_...</a><p>And here is how different parties voted: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;i.redd.it&#x2F;xcr22o59g5811.png" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;i.redd.it&#x2F;xcr22o59g5811.png</a>
评论 #17467681 未加载
giomascealmost 7 years ago
Wonderful, thanks to everyone that helped making some pressing on the MEPs, from Wikipedia to the last of the tweeters!
Already__Takenalmost 7 years ago
Looks like votewatch.eu has gone done, I presume from all of us checking what MP&#x27;s we&#x27;re going to have the school.
评论 #17468055 未加载
bluecalmalmost 7 years ago
Seeing how close it was I am really pessimistic about EU and further integration. I want my country to have a shot at sane copyright&#x2F;patent&#x2F;tax laws. If they fail I want other countries to have that shot, maybe at least one succeed and I could move there. With one centralized government there will be nowhere to run if things like UK prison-for-wrongthink or German&#x2F;Spanish copyright and censorpship laws are implemented.
评论 #17462437 未加载
评论 #17462657 未加载
评论 #17468188 未加载
评论 #17465347 未加载
Jacq5almost 7 years ago
This is still quite a defeat IMHO. The vote was won just by a margin of 40 votes. The real deal will cover up in September. If the margin gets smaller - were kinda busted. If the negative votes increases - well, the internet might be saved. Now only money talks and who takes which side will decide onto the rest.
Klimentalmost 7 years ago
List of votes is on pages 7-8 of this document:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.europarl.europa.eu&#x2F;sides&#x2F;getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNONSGML%2bPV%2b20180705%2bRES-RCV%2bDOC%2bPDF%2bV0%2f%2fEN&amp;language=EN" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.europarl.europa.eu&#x2F;sides&#x2F;getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2f...</a>
评论 #17464892 未加载
quikoaalmost 7 years ago
Nice, that&#x27;s one bullet dodged! Back to the drawing board doesn&#x27;t sound very comforting.
评论 #17462185 未加载
nkkollawalmost 7 years ago
Wow, not by a huge margin. I&#x27;m sure it will pass sooner or later.<p>It&#x27;s really amazing how people have to keep these idiots that are _supposed to_ be there to guard our interests in check.<p>As long as parties are allowed to accept contributions, things like this will happen. It should be absolutely forbidden to give any politician any money--both while campaigning and in case of victory. That way they would actually work for us and not corporations.
shmerlalmost 7 years ago
Congratulations! But they&#x27;ll come back with some new garbage, they always do. So there will another need to repeal something like that.
jopsenalmost 7 years ago
Many commenters here point out that this is not necessarily the end, and that lobbyist will keep trying. Seemingly implying that this is an eventuality.<p>I don&#x27;t think so, if we keep fighting we can win this. I for one plan to keep applying pressure to members of the legal committee.<p>Realistic optimism is not a cause for complacency. But we must also recognize that this is battle we can win, as to not give up without a fight. For all the faults of our democracies let&#x27;s recognize that it worked today :)
dev_dullalmost 7 years ago
This not only a problem with the EU, but with concentrated power in general. It wouldn&#x27;t be cost effective to lobby every single government to pass this type of legislation, but when you concentrate it into a single place, suddenly intense lobbying becomes cost effective.<p>I have a similar attitude to the US Federal government and why I think state rights are supreme. You lose economies of scale, but gain a distributed and hard(er) to corrupt system.
评论 #17468161 未加载
chmikealmost 7 years ago
Remove articles 11 and 13 with too ambiguous and fuzzy limits. They provide an open door to abuse.<p>It&#x27;s time to change business models and evolve. Destroying the internet just to protect some profits should not be an option. Make subventions from states to newspapers illegal. Make scholar journals selling other peoples work in numeric form illegal.<p>Terminate google news and equivalent services. Journals don&#x27;t deserve that free publicity.
评论 #17462409 未加载
nlalmost 7 years ago
People seem to be viewing this through the eyes of US copyright proposals (longer terms, stronger enforcement etc).<p>That&#x27;s not was this was at all. It was a change in the liability structure to make platforms liable for content published on their platform.<p>It was basically about news. European news organisations hate that people are getting news via Google and Facebook so they want to restrict that.
isthatartalmost 7 years ago
Open Science fan here, I have some concrete questions about this copyright, publishers and linktax story, for example: (0) - will Scihub be affected? (1) - will arXiv link instead of the published article link be affected? (2) - will the social media companies start to apply filters to the search results and timelines???
评论 #17477758 未加载
cedivadalmost 7 years ago
So the internet won... By a 6% margin.
nomercy400almost 7 years ago
So, is the EU Parliament postponing it because they didn&#x27;t like the media attention and want to try it again when there are other things that attract media attention in three months time, or because they actually think it is a bad idea?
评论 #17462352 未加载
评论 #17462412 未加载
评论 #17462241 未加载
duxupalmost 7 years ago
Thank goodness, that thing was horrific. It even read like ISPs were supposed to filter user content.<p>It was Copyright &gt; everything else &gt; freedom of speech (granted I get that&#x27;s a US phrase but you get my point).
jejones3141almost 7 years ago
Glad to hear it, but eternal vigilance etc. Keep an eye on them.
hmd_imputeralmost 7 years ago
First #GDPR, now #Uploadfilter... What is next? A totally censored internet? The EU is becoming more and more absurd with its regulations that do nothing but hinder technological advancement. Already way behind than the East Asian countries as well the US and Canada...
评论 #17462344 未加载
评论 #17462347 未加载
评论 #17462385 未加载
评论 #17462363 未加载
bjrnioalmost 7 years ago
Does anyone know if (and how) you can check which MEPs voted for and against it? Does that data get published somewhere?