TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

The EU's Copyright Proposal Is Extremely Bad News for Everyone, Even Wikipedia

253 点作者 Mononokay将近 7 年前

10 条评论

tehabe将近 7 年前
For all EU citizens please write, call, speak to your MEP! The vote is on June 20. This cannot wait until the law is done. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;saveyourinternet.eu&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;saveyourinternet.eu&#x2F;</a>
评论 #17263445 未加载
评论 #17261266 未加载
tofof将近 7 年前
On this side of the Atlantic, we successfully blocked SOPA from becoming reality (so far).<p>Looks like it&#x27;s your turn, EU techies.
评论 #17260551 未加载
dingo_bat将近 7 年前
Government mandated, privately paid censorship. That&#x27;s what it has come to. Again, just like GDPR, this won&#x27;t hurt any big sites at all (Youtube already does this). But smaller players will struggle, and users will get inconvenienced and censored.
tannhaeuser将近 7 年前
IMHO it isn&#x27;t helpful that anti-&quot;copyright&quot;-reform initiatives such as <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;saveyourinternet.eu&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;saveyourinternet.eu&#x2F;</a>, <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;juliareda.eu&#x2F;2018&#x2F;05&#x2F;censorship-machines-link-tax-finish-line&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;juliareda.eu&#x2F;2018&#x2F;05&#x2F;censorship-machines-link-tax-fi...</a> and now EFF use clickbaity, juvenile, and outright incorrect arguments, foul language, and lacking nuance. Am I an outlier in thinking that YouTube&#x2F;Google and others should be held liable for willfully profitting from &quot;copyright&quot; infringement at a massive scale, yet simply find the proposed law very badly done and in obvious need of consideration? The elephant in the room being that there is no &quot;media database&quot; that could be used for content scanning; the entire concept is technically infeasible. The whole idea of scanning &quot;uploads&quot; stinks; why not requiring that works are linked to rather uploaded, or use HTML metadata to represent an asserted license&#x2F;&quot;copyright&quot; weaver. Moreover, the law isn&#x27;t aligned with press laws: it&#x27;s completely unclear who is subject to this law in the first place eg. if you&#x27;re hosting sites on your domain, or at your IP, yet others take responsibility and are mentioned by name for the site&#x27;s content (under VisdP in German press law, for example).
评论 #17263605 未加载
评论 #17263816 未加载
评论 #17273343 未加载
politician将近 7 年前
Copyright.<p>These media companies would be all over a technology that injected content via direct neural stimulation at an authorized retail outlet.<p>Or a technology that was a permanently sealed container containing the content that must never ever ever be shared. After all, if you can prevent sharing it 1 million times, that translates into pretty low false negative rate on preventing acceptable sharing.<p>Or a tax collected that covered 100% of estimated revenues &quot;just in case&quot;.<p>Ads, however, are vitally important to our global economy and must be shared widely, as wide as possible.
skrebbel将近 7 年前
I still don&#x27;t understand how roughly the same people can do so well at the GDPR and at the same time screw up so badly on this copyright stuff.<p>I mean, sure, GDPR isn&#x27;t perfect but at its core it&#x27;s a pro-citizen thing that has some decent vision behind it and had to resist a <i>lot</i> of corporate lobbying to make it through. This copyright bill seems to be the opposite in every respect.<p>If anyone can explain to me how the same organizations can do both these things at about the same time then I&#x27;d love to learn :-)
评论 #17260363 未加载
评论 #17262668 未加载
评论 #17260771 未加载
评论 #17263277 未加载
评论 #17260396 未加载
评论 #17261569 未加载
评论 #17260988 未加载
soufron将近 7 年前
Come on... this is not &quot;Eu&#x27;s copyright Proposal&quot;... it&#x27;s one proposal, from one MEP, for one commission of the Parliament...
评论 #17262226 未加载
IanCal将近 7 年前
&gt; Under Article 13 of the proposal, sites that allow users to post text, sounds, code, still or moving images, or other copyrighted works for public consumption will have to filter all their users&#x27; submissions against a database of copyrighted works. Sites will have to pay to license the technology to match submissions to the database, and to identify near matches as well as exact ones. Sites will be required to have a process to allow rightsholders to update this list with more copyrighted works.<p>I don&#x27;t understand where this level of detail has come from. Can someone explain?<p>Here&#x27;s article 13 as far as I can tell<p>&gt; Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter.<p>&gt; 2.Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1.<p>&gt; 3.Member States shall facilitate, where appropriate, the cooperation between the information society service providers and rightholders through stakeholder dialogues to define best practices, such as appropriate and proportionate content recognition technologies, taking into account, among others, the nature of the services, the availability of the technologies and their effectiveness in light of technological developments.<p>Edit -<p>&gt; after Article 13 becomes law, any information hosted in the EU might disappear—and links to US mirrors might become infringing<p>How would links be infringing? Also where in A13 are they talked about at all?<p>Edit 2 -<p>I need to dig out a source but I&#x27;m near certain that there is an allowance for review, critique and satirisation of the news in the EU docs they&#x27;re talking about.<p>&gt; news sites may seek to withhold linking licenses from critics who want to quote from them in order to analyze, correct and critique their articles
评论 #17260468 未加载
评论 #17260680 未加载
merinowool将近 7 年前
All content will have to go through &quot;filters&quot; - that means it is the end of end to end encrypted services.
评论 #17261300 未加载
sbhn将近 7 年前
It’s only bad for Californian copyright lawyers
评论 #17261652 未加载