EU wants to ban online memes

[Swordsmyth]

The proposed Copyright Directive, which will be put to a vote in the European Parliament on June 20, could see restrictions on remixes and other user-generated content.
If passed, Article 13 of the Directive will push online platform providers to “take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rights-holders for the use of their works.”
That means popular memes inspired by copyrighted images, such as the timeless “One Does Not Simply…” from Lord of the Rings, could be deleted from the web under a “Robo-copyright regime” according to campaigners.
Those demanding Article 13 be struck down say it will “destroy the internet as we know it” and lead to bots censoring and deleting online content with no understanding of the context.

It means the likes of Facebook or Twitter could simply scan a single version of an image, video or song and simply drop the block hammer on anything that somewhat duplicates that piece of media. So, the parodies that often tickle us on lunch breaks or during the morning commute could be removed too.
Executive director Kim Killock told the BBC: “Unfortunately, while machines can spot duplicate uploads of Beyonce songs, they can’t spot parodies, understand memes that use copyright images, or make any kind of cultural judgement about what creative people are doing. We see this all too often on YouTube already.
“Add to that, the EU wants to apply the Robocop approach to extremism, hate speech, and anything else they think can get away with, once they put it in place for copyright. This would be disastrous.”

More at: http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/e...ur-joy-3483221

[Swordsmyth]

In 2015, Internet pioneer Matt Drudge warned that the establishment would try to ban links to news stories without paid permission from the site – and now the EU’s proposed Article 11 could do just that.
During an interview on the Alex Jones Show, Drudge revealed that copyright laws which prevent websites from even linking to news stories were being drafted.
“I had a Supreme Court Justice tell me it’s over for me,” he said. “They’ve got the votes now to enforce copyright law, you’re out of there. They’re going to make it so you can’t even use headlines.”


“To have a Supreme Court Justice say to me it’s over, they’ve got the votes, which means time is limited.”
On June 20, the EU will vote on its proposed Copyright Reform, which includes Article 11, aka the link tax, that would “force anyone using snippets of journalistic online content to get a license for the publisher first — essentially outlawing current business models of most aggregators and news apps,” according to an article from TheNextWeb.com.


In other words, Article 11 outlaws fair use reporting of news articles – such as this article – and critics even warn that the vagueness of Article 11 could ban websites like the Drudge Report from even linking to news articles, just as Matt Drudge warned nearly three years ago.
BoingBoing.net goes into even further detail:
Article 11’s link tax allows news sites to decide who gets to link to them, meaning that they can exclude their critics. With election cycles dominated by hoaxes and fake news, the right of a news publisher to decide who gets to criticize it is carte blanche to lie and spin.
“That will end (it) for me – fine – I’ve had a hell of a run,” said Drudge, warning web users were being forced into the Internet “ghettos” of Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.
“This is ghetto, this is corporate, they’re taking your energy and you’re getting nothing in return – nothing!”

https://www.infowars.com/drudge-warn...ernet-freedom/

[Swordsmyth]

The European Parliament Committee on Legal Affairs just voted ‘yes’ on highly controversial parts of the EU’s new Copyright Reform. The controversial articles — 11 and 13 — effectively establish link tax, censorship machines, and ban memes.
There was heavy resistance to the contested articles from internet activists, lobbyists, and members of European Parliament (MEPs), but all was for nought and the articles passed with a 13:12 and 15:10 majority.

The committee’s vote doesn’t automatically make the Copyright reform and its controversial articles law. Instead, it cements the European Parliament’s stance on the issue — which is highly influential — before entering the final stage of the legislation process.
However, there is a way to change that. Plenary is the European Parliament’s tool to bring matters out of committee and put up for a vote in the Parliament itself, i.e. have all 751 MEPs vote instead of only 25. But there needs to be enough support in Parliament for this to happen, so opposers have already started campaigning for a plenary session.



More at: https://thenextweb.com/eu/2018/06/20...-tax-what-now/

[Swordsmyth]

If you do live in an EU country, check out this website to take action on stopping this terrible law.

[VIDEODROME]

What if a person actually pays for an image from a Stock Photo company it gets censored by this automated process?

[thoughtomator]

[TheTexan]

That means popular memes inspired by copyrighted images, such as the timeless “One Does Not Simply…” from Lord of the Rings, could be deleted from the web

[merkelstan]

It goes beyond this.

The machinery required to do this staggers imagination. The directive calls for comparing every snippet of data uploaded anywhere, to EVERY COPYRIGHTED WORK EVER RELEASED. Yes, our posts to ronpaulforums.com as well.

The amount of data to compare one post to, is absolutely insane. This sets a cost barrier to all of our uploads, comments, and videos.

Beyond this, only $$megacorp will have the resources to perform this filtering and pattern matching. Guess who owns those. Guess who will decide whether your content is allowed or not. Guess how much of a sh!t they will give if it's really copyright violation, or just against their interests to allow?

The curses crowd my mouth.

[Bern]

This is some Draconian bull$#@!. Any website/company that gets a large enough audience is going to find themselves tied to govco puppet strings. The filtering mechanisms they build to comply with these articles can be used to filter content for other (political) purposes.

[Aratus]

Even if they had a program where MEMES that receive complaints go to the top of the list,
Any short phrase with an often repeated visual image that is also complained about could
be DELEATED. this empties out one's Facebook timeline to 1/10th of our normal volume!!!

[Swordsmyth]

The legislative body of the European Union on Thursday voted against a law that would have significantly reformed copyright rules on the internet, Politico reported.
The European Parliament rejected legislation that would have implemented harsher copyright enforcement rules online. Opponents of the measure warned it could alter the future of the web.


The European Parliament rejected the bill, with 318 against it and 278 in favor. Another 31 lawmakers abstained, according to Politico.
The legislation will be sent back to Parliament for further discussion. Lawmakers can submit changes to the bill, which is likely to spark further debate.

More at: http://thehill.com/policy/technology...ould-ban-memes

[Bern]

Thanks for the update.

[Swordsmyth]

European parliamentarians have passed a controversial overhaul of copyright law that could force tech giants to install filters that prevent copyright-protected content from being uploaded.
Lawmakers in Strasbourg, France, voted on Wednesday in favor of the European Union's revamped directive, which is aimed at bringing the bloc's rules on copyright into the 21st century.
The copyright reform was passed with 438 votes in favor, 226 against and 39 abstentions.
But critics say such a law would normalize censorship and restrict internet freedom, preventing users from being able to post content ranging from memes to links to articles from news outlets.
The controversy mainly surrounds two sections of the law — Articles 11 and 13.
Article 11 would grant press publications copyright over the sharing of their content online, meaning they would be able to charge services like Google News for aggregating their stories. Critics have dubbed this as an effective "link tax," but proponents say hyperlinks will be exempt.
Meanwhile, Article 13 calls for "effective content recognition" technology to filter out copyright-protected content. Detractors hold that this part of the law could threaten social media users' ability to share anything from internet memes to snippets of music and film.
Member of the European Parliament Axel Voss — a key supporter of the directive — said parliament had addressed concerns raised by activists, citing amendments including the exclusion of "small and micro platforms or aggregators" from the scope of legislation.


Reacting to the result of the vote, Julia Reda, a German Pirate Party lawmaker, said it was "catastrophic" that the parliament voted in favor of the most controversial pieces of the legislation.
"Final vote for Parliament position on the copyright directive with #UploadFilters and #LinkTax adopted," she wrote in a tweet. "Parliament has failed to listen to citizens' and experts' concerns."


Opponents of the directive have been using the hashtag #SaveYourInternet on social media.
"The legislation is now better balanced, answering many of the concerns of journalists, publishers and musicians whose work was being shared freely online without stifling innovation or fundamentally changing the nature of the internet," Sajjad Karim, a British Conservative lawmaker, said in a statement following the vote.
"It also takes into account the rights of users, ensuring that materials used for teaching and research, and by cultural and heritage organizations, are not encumbered by unnecessary restrictions."
What's next?

Wednesday's vote won't be the last you've heard about the EU's copyright reforms.
Lawmakers had initially voted to delay the vote, rejecting the version of the directive that had been agreed by a committee at that time.
Now that politicians in Strasbourg have come to an agreement, the next stage for the law will be what's known as "trilogue," which consists of talks between European Parliament, EU executive body the European Commission, and a collective of the leaders of EU member states known as the European Council.
And even once the directive goes through this process, it will still require each individual EU nation to decide on how they will implement the new rules.

More at: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/12/eu-l...right-law.html

[Swordsmyth]

And just as a side note, it appears Twitter doesn’t want its users to know about Article 13.

Article 13 was number 2 on trending and Twitter have just removed it.
— Count Dankula�������������� (@CountDankulaTV) September 12, 2018

******

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...tax-and-upload

[Swordsmyth]

After passing in the European Parliament, the Directive will now enter informal negotiations between the European Commission, Council and Parliament. The three organisation will decide on the final wording of the legislation before presenting it to the EU Legal Affairs Committee at some point, mostly likely around December.
In January 2019, the Directive will go back to the European Parliament for a vote on the final wording. This is just ahead of elections to the European Parliament, so MEPs may well start paying attention to vocal constituents as they start to consider the prospect of their re-election.
Assuming the Directive passes, member states of the EU then have two years to pass laws that will bring their laws in line with the new regulations. EU directives aren’t laws in themselves, but simply compel national governments to pass their own laws that make the directives a reality, so it still very much remains to be seen how any of the articles in the Directive will actually be implemented when it comes to the real world.

More at: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/what...ained-meme-ban

[AZJoe]

[AZJoe]

[TheTexan]

So are the memes deleted now?

[Swordsmyth]

Europe is currently considering new legislation that would require companies like Google and Facebook to scan all uploaded content and remove any copyrighted material. Known as Article 13, the move has faced a lot of pushback, and YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki has addressed the issue in her latest letter to creators. "This growing creative economy is at risk, as the EU Parliament voted on Article 13, copyright legislation that could drastically change the internet that you see today," she wrote.




Wojcicki goes on to say that Article 13 could lead to some users not being allowed to upload content on YouTube and that it could block European Union users from watching certain content. "This legislation poses a threat to both your livelihood and your ability to share your voice with the world. And, if implemented as proposed, Article 13 threatens hundreds of thousands of jobs, European creators, businesses, artists and everyone they employ," Wojcicki said. "The proposal could force platforms, like YouTube, to allow only content from a small number of large companies." She explains that since the company would be liable for content under the directive, it would be "too risky" to allow smaller creators to continue to post their content.

More at: https://www.engadget.com/2018/10/22/...tens-creators/

[heavenlyboy34]

Thanks for all this, Swordsmyth. All the IP whores are getting their just desserts in this. Us anti-IP folks have long been warning that IP is inherently tyrannical and would lead to this kind of thing. Told ya so. Kurwa.

[Swordsmyth]

Thanks for all this, Swordsmyth. All the IP whores are getting their just desserts in this. Us anti-IP folks have long been warning that IP is inherently tyrannical and would lead to this kind of thing. Told ya so. Kurwa.

I believe in limited IP to encourage innovation/creation but you need things like "reasonable use" and IP and copyrights in particular have been insane since before I was born.

[AZJoe]

[Swordsmyth]

I wouldn't be surprised, remember when customs was instructed to be on the look out for people smuggling bitcoins?

[Swordsmyth]

Internet giant Google on Monday urged the European Parliament to resist approving a planned overhaul of the bloc's online copyright law that the company said would hurt Europe for "decades to come".European lawmakers could vote as soon as next week on the landmark legislation that is intended to modernise copyright for the digital age but has set off a furious lobbying war in Brussels.
Tech giants, artistic creators and EU member states have battled for three years over the reform, with Google making a last-minute effort to dissuade MEPs from passing the law this month.
The biggest stumbling block has been a provision that calls for Google-owned YouTube and other platforms to remove illegal content using automatic filters, or face massive liability.
Despite certain benefits, this aspect of the reform "creates vague, untested requirements" that would lead to the websites "over-blocking content", said Kent Walker, Google's senior vice president of global affairs in a blog post.
"This would be bad for creators and users, who will see online services wrongly block content simply because they need to err on the side of caution and reduce legal risks," he added.
These "unintended consequences" may "hurt Europe's creative economy for decades to come," he added.
Another bone of contention is a provision to create "neighbouring rights" -- that opponents call a link tax -- for media publishers.
News organisations, including AFP, have pushed for the move, arguing that giants like Facebook and Google make billions in revenue from advertising tied to news stories, while publishers suffer.
The planned reform "hurts small and emerging publishers, and limits consumer access to a diversity of news sources," said Walker.
"Under the directive, showing anything beyond mere facts, hyperlinks and 'individual words and very short extracts' would be restricted," he warned.
At first considered a formality, the outcome of the vote in the European Parliament is now highly uncertain.

https://news.yahoo.com/google-fights...161523233.html

[Swordsmyth]

https://tech.slashdot.org/story/19/0...yright-reforms

EU lawmakers today endorsed an overhaul of the bloc's two-decade old copyright rules, which will force Google and Facebook to pay publishers for use of news snippets and make them filter out protected content. From a report:

The set of copyright rules known as the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, but more succinctly as the EU Copyright Directive, has been debated and discussed for several years. While it is broadly uncontroversial in many regards, there are two facets to the directive that has caused the internet to freak out. Article 11, which has been dubbed the "link tax," stipulates that websites pay publishers a fee if they display excerpts of copyrighted content -- or even link to it. This obviously could have big ramifications for services such as Google News. Then there is Article 13, dubbed the "upload filter," which would effectively make digital platforms legally liable for any copyright infringements on their platform, which has stoked fears that it would stop people from sharing content -- such as GIF-infused memes -- on social networks.

In a statement, EFF said, "In a stunning rejection of the will five million online petitioners, and over 100,000 protestors this weekend, the European Parliament has abandoned common-sense and the advice of academics, technologists, and UN human rights experts, and approved the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive in its entirety."






Also known as the Link Tax. There is nothing that they wont tax to perpetuate their Fiat Currency.

...

[Swordsmyth]

There’s now little that can stop these provisions from becoming the law of the land across Europe. It’s theoretically possible that the final text will fail to gain a majority of member states’ approval when the European Council meets later this month, but this would require at least one key country to change its mind. Toward that end, German and Polish activists are already re-doubling their efforts to shift their government’s key votes.

If that attempt fails, the results will be drawn-out, and chaotic. Unlike EU Regulations like the GDPR, which become law on passage by the central EU institutions, EU Directives have to be transposed: written into each member country’s national law. Countries have until 2021 to transpose the Copyright Directive, but EU rarely keeps its members to that deadline, so it could take even longer.
Unfortunately, it is likely that the first implementation of the Directive will come from the countries who have most enthusiastically supported its passage. France’s current batch of national politicians have consistently advocated for the worst parts of the Directive, and the Macron administration may seek to grab an early win for the country’s media establishment.
Countries whose polity were more divided will no doubt take longer. In Poland, politicians were besieged by angry voters wanting them to vote down the Directive, while simultaneously facing brazen denunciations from national and local newspaper owners warning that they would “not forget” any politician who voted against Article 11. The passing of the Directive will still leave that division between the Polish people and the media establishment, with politicians struggling to find a domestic solution that won’t damage their prospects with either group.
The rhetoric in Germany in the last few days was not much better. German politicians claimed with straight faces that the tech companies had paid this weekend’s protestors to march on the streets. Meanwhile, the Christian Democratic Union, Angela Merkel’s party, whose own Axel Voss as the ringleader for the Directive, put out a policy proposal that suggested it could implement Article 13 not with filters, but with a blanket licensing regime. Legal experts have already said that these licenses won’t comply with Article 13’s stringent requirements – but it’s going to be hard for the CDU to walk back from that commitment now.
Which brings us to the future prospect of legal challenges in Europe’s courts. Again, unlike the GDPR, which gave existing regulatory bodies the clear power to adjudicate and enforce that law and its ambiguities, it’s unclear who is supposed to impose consistency in the EU between, say, a harsh French regime and a potentially softer German solution, or interpret the Directive’s notoriously incoherent text.
That means it will fall by default to Europe’s judicial system, and the long, slow road to a final decision by the EU’s superior court, the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
We can expect media and rightsholders to lobby for the most draconian possible national laws, then promptly march to the courts to extract fines whenever anyone online wanders over its fuzzy lines. The Directive is written so that any owner of copyrighted material can demand satisfaction from an Internet service, and we’ve already seen that the rightsholders are by no means united on what Big Tech should be doing. Whatever Internet companies and organizations do to comply with twenty-seven or more national laws – from dropping links to European news sites entirely, to upping their already over-sensitive filtering systems, or seeking to strike deals with key media conglomerates – will be challenged by one rightsholder faction or another.
But there’s also opportunities for the courts to rein in the Directive – or even throw out its worst articles entirely. One key paradox at the heart of the Directive will have to be resolved very soon. Article 13 is meant to be compatible with the older E-Commerce Directive, which explicitly forbids any requirement to proactively monitor for IP enforcement (a provision that was upheld and strengthened by the ECJ in 2011). Any law mandating filters could be challenged to settle this inconsistency.
But who will represent Internet users in court? Big Tech has some of the motive and the millions to do it, but after this heavy defeat, those increasingly defensive giants may well decide that it will be better to settle out of court, and strike a deal that pays a danegeld to the established media in Europe – at a price that will conveniently lock out any potential tech upstarts to their market dominance in that market.
That means Europe’s Internet users can’t depend on the tech companies to fight this. The battle will have to continue, as it has done in these last few weeks, with millions of everyday users uniting online and on the streets to demand their right to be free of censorship, and free to communicate without algorithmic censors or arbitrary licensing requirements.
EU netizens will need to organize and support independent European digital rights groups willing to challenge the Directive in court.

And outside Europe, friends of the Internet will have to brace themselves to push back against copyright maximalists attempting to export this terrible Directive to the rest of the world. We must, and we will, regroup and stand together to stop this Directive in Europe, and prevent it spreading further.


More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...t-happens-next

[shakey1]

[Swordsmyth]

13 MEPs were tricked into voting for the European Union Copyright Directive when they initially planned to vote against it, a crucial error which led to the measure passing by just 5 votes, but the EU has refused to hold the vote again.
“An extra vote was inserted into the voting list at the last minute which threw most MEPs’ voting lists out of sync,” reports the Guido Fawkes blog. “Unlike the Commons where MPs have to physically make the decision to walk through lobbies, MEPs just robotically press buttons according to a long voting list handed out to them. A clear warning of the dangers of electronic voting…”
Since the measure passed by a mere 5 votes, the 13 votes that went the wrong way were crucial to the outcome. If the MEPs had not been tricked, they would not have been blocked from voting on amendments to the bill, including the notorious Article 13.


However, despite complaints, the EU has refused to revisit the result of the vote or hold the vote again, merely agreeing to change the voting record of the individual MEPs.
“It’s appalling, but that’s how this place works on a regular basis,” said Brexit Party MEP Bill Etheridge . “It’s only come to people’s attention this time because it’s a high profile issue.”
This is a shocking illustration of how the EU operates. The vote has basically been stolen and yet the European Parliament refuses to do anything about it.

More at: https://www.infowars.com/meps-tricke...fuses-do-over/

[AngryCanadian]

Thanks for the updates the only one way this bill and law will end is when Europeans wake up and end the EU Union itself.

EU=

[Swordsmyth]

Thanks for the updates the only one way this bill and law will end is when Europeans wake up and end the EU Union itself.

EU=

My pleasure, and I agree, after they rigged the vote there is no way they will give this up, fortunately the EU won't last much longer.
I hope it isn't replaced by something as bad or worse.