It's called censorship by media, but actually it's not. Websites are supposed to automatically check/clean illegal content. I wouldn't call that censorship. Also paying for content taken from other sites is not censorship. If you want to provide content - create it yourself or buy it. But for sure many aggregators will go out of business, because they benefit from actually stolen content. For the statistic user changes will be minimal - for example you will have to visit more portals or dig deeper for torrents and such. No biggie.
Comment has been collapsed.
Pretty much. One of the aims is to protect artists. photographers etc from having their work stolen for financial gain (ie wallpaper sites that generate ad revenue from uploading others work without permission) or political gain / malformation (like when far right groups rip images to make memes etc).
The people against it I've spoken to are generally ill informed or tinfoil hat vendors.
Comment has been collapsed.
Websites are supposed to automatically check/clean illegal content. I wouldn't call that censorship
What about false positives?
What about it's not the job of a private entity to determine what is legal or what is not?
The current system clearly defines the roles of the platform and of the people posting on the platform: the platform's responsibility is to remove contents, if it appears appropriate, when a complaint is made, and then the person who made the complaint and the person who posted the content sort it out. It works fine-ish, it is balanced, and it allows for a minimum level of free speech (at least you can post stuff and have it up for a while, even if it ends up removed)
The new system would force platform to filter contents before they are made available online. 2 consequences:
1) platforms are not neutral anymore, they become content editors. Facebook likes being a content editor and is one already, but maybe other platforms want to remain just platforms and not editors
2) running a platform where people can post freely becomes out of reach for everyone but huge companies who can afford building a $50M content filter*. The end of independent forums (no more Steamgifts forums I guess?). The end of blogs with comments. A very harsh environment for new startups to emerge in the platform business. As if it wasn't already hard enough to try and build a competitor to Youtube/Facebook/Twitter. You must really hate Internet.
Oh and yes, it is censorship, and the worst possible one: one made by black-box algorithms, taking decisiosn without obvious reasons (deep learning is great, but no way in hell to know exactly what's happening in that computer-brain)
-* My guess, though, is that a few big entities like Big Brother Google or Facebook will gladly provide a filtering API, this way they will know what people say even in private forums, or in posts that get removed, or in off-platform private messages (pretty sure if such an API is provided, some lazy people will just put in all their forms no matter where the result is posted). A totally centralized web, hurray! And all this "to protect artists". LOL. And what about protecting the Internet, for a change?
Comment has been collapsed.
It is apparent that you genuinely have no idea what you are blithering about.
The only valid thing you have stated there is "What about false positives?" of which there will be many, because that end of the article is poorly laid out, thought about and planned.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is apparent that you genuinely have no idea what you are blithering about.
Actually, you're the one having no clue apparently:
Comment has been collapsed.
(This post gives you a short explanation, links to further educate yourself and some links you can use to fight against this.) Edit: this post is exaggarated/misinformed about the restrictions on (non-commercial/non-traced) fan content (fanart, fanfiction), but gif sets, videos, music, memes, etc that use copyrighted material eg. gameplay videos will be blocked by the algorithm!
About the link tax/article 11 here.
About article 13 here. If these are also misinformed, or you have a better explanation, please tell me.
Make sure to scroll down and read the consequences.
.
Contact your MEP: https://saveyourinternet.eu/, https://savethelink.org/
Sign a petition: https://www.change.org/p/european-parliament-stop-the-censorship-machinery-save-the-internet?recruiter=50668942&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_initial
Comment has been collapsed.
Original work no, fanart and such, yes, from what I know. If you know differently, could you please explain, or tell me where I could read what it'd really be like? I'd read the laws themselves but I doubt I'd understand a lot. A lot of articles, like this one say that it will affect fan content as well, plus many other things.
[...] The law would also have a profound impact on the sharing of fan art, video-game streaming, movie trailer reactions and a wide range of pop culture-focused blogs created by users [...]
Comment has been collapsed.
It wont affect fan work based on IPs if the work itself is original (such things are a classic case of "fair use" if non-commerical), but copying an image of say, Darth Vader from a movie still may be affected (though technically still fair use if non-commercial). If it did affect it outside of this basic scope, then this new law would violate international copyright law.
It will affect "fandom" such as memes and other things that utilise assets (images, video etc) without the copyright holders permission. Similarly, it wont affect fan fiction on the same counts.
I've no doubt many of those in "fandom" aghast at it, are many of the same people who upload others work and take credit for it (which from the fan artists I network with is apparently a massive problem). Theres also the issue of "fandom" often being a for-profit thing - which is one of the things that will likely be stomped on by this.
Comment has been collapsed.
I see! Thank you very much for your answer.
As for that last point, does this mean that artists who offer commissions(/prints) that include fanart will be unable to do so in the future or will only be able to offer original work? Because I think most commission requests are probably for fanart, at least in certain communities, so this would affect the way those artists are able to make a living (if they do that/part of that by taking commissions) a lot. Unless they can work around it by doing it in private or something, I'm not sure.
Comment has been collapsed.
If any artist is doing "fanart" and not doing an original piece (ie just directly copying the works of others - the cover of Ghost In The Shell for instance) theyve already breached copyright as well as ethical standards in the art community. These are not people that should be supported in any way, shape or form.
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't mean like a trace or anything like that, simply that they're making an art piece that features some characters from a movie/anime/etc.
So not a redraw of, for example, this scene: http://otakukart.com/animeblog/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Saitama-defeated.png
But maybe something like this? https://pre00.deviantart.net/7e36/th/pre/i/2017/338/a/4/saitama_vs_thanos_by_drawslave-dbvsq59.jpg
Comment has been collapsed.
Then thats covered (in most cases) by "fair use" as its an original work BASED on characters from an IP. it only becomes an issue if its commercialised, merchandised or "for-profit". If you just think one day, "Hey, i have a cool idea for a cover for issue 737 of spiderman" that never got done, and you do it, and upload it, theres nothing wrong with that, and this new law should at not point prevent it. However Id be surprised if there were not teething problems - especially where larger companies have, in fact, ripped ideas from smaller name artists some time ago.
"Fair use" can be a murky area (just look at the hsitory of full movie and album uploads to youtube under assumed "fair use"), but basically, if the comissioned artist has a solid contract they get signed (ACTUALLY SIGNED) that outlines neither THEY nor the comissioner owns the IP to the characters, that they do not transfer copyright ownership of the work through the comission, it cannot be resold, relicenced or merchandised, AND that they only charge a basic labour rate (this is best worked out per hour at whatever minimum wage is local), then any angry, fearing-for-their-overpaid-and-mostly-unrequired-position lawyer will have little ground to stand on with a DMCA or other action. This can also help in cases where "fair use" is questioned - if you havent made a profit and have simply been getting paid to labour (and not be a creative force), then again the FFTOAMUP lawyer will have to sit on thier hands. of course they can still ask / demand a site takes it down (especially in the case of things that might damage the IP such as sexualised images etc).
Of course, theres a big market on etsy etc of people selling these works as prints, t shirts and so on - to do that you actually need a licence. On deviantart people get away with it (though I suspect DA has some legal team working to clear any claims by paiying IP holders off with a % should they want - though its also an actual art site, which again makes things a little different).
Edit: and I should point out Im an artist, and thats how I've made my living for the last 10 years (nearly 30 total including time when it wasnt my profession) and have fought all my own legal battles sucessfully, to the degree I've never even had to go to court - and .FFTOAMUP's hate me for it ;D
Edit2: scuse spelling. im crap at it some days.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not a problem. I'd rather you had a better understanding of the situation than a tinfoil hat merchants cry of war from an ill informed tumblr post! ;)
Edit: I should add that one thing that is always protected by "fair use" is satire (though you have to fully undertsnad what constitues satire to make it work for you). this may even extend in some cases to profitable ventures as transformative work.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't trust people with a conflict of interests, check out other point of views before making yourself an option.
I bookmarked this article a while ago, maybe not the best but still I find it quite educational on Article 11 and Article 13: https://boingboing.net/2018/06/18/licensing-news.html
This one is interesting too, notably detailing which countries and parties are more or less supportive of this law: https://boingboing.net/2018/06/18/asymmetric-information-war.html
Comment has been collapsed.
I should point out Im an artist
[...]
I'd rather you had a better understanding of the situation than a tinfoil hat merchants
You've got an obvious conflicts of interests and you still take the liberty of being insulting to people who understand Internet better than you. "I'm going to f*** Internet because I think it will boost my sales by 2%", how lovely.
Comment has been collapsed.
What?
I have no conflict of interests in pointing out the facts regarding how this will not affect fan art if original and what "fair use" means (especially as I do not do fan art).
Secondly, I make no money from internet sales. Maybe you should get a job as a crab. I hear they do well going sideways on things.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have no conflict of interests
You do if you're an artist and then support a measure that you define as protecting the artists. That's pretty much the definition of a conflict of interests. (even though that depiction is not that true IMO, protecting copyright is just an excuse to pass a mass-censorship law and apparently you're falling for it)
Comment has been collapsed.
The whole italian wikipedia is obscured/blocked to raise awareness.
Comment has been collapsed.
We had already in Poland the whole country protests against it, you are late :P
Smaller sites will be removed, memes will be stopped, sharing information will be illegal without paying and such
we call it ACTA 2.0
And when I asked my German friend what Germans are doing against it, he said that he never heard about it and when he tries to google, the only thing he can find is in Polish language...
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah I don't know how so many people are still unaware of it... I read about it in about every of my IT RSS feeds, even before it passed the first vote a few weeks ago.
Comment has been collapsed.
And this means that the small companies will NOT be able to put up with the large corporations, who have money and lawyers to take care about compliance. So this legislation is going to stifle competition, freedom of expression and will be bad for the EUropean Union and the world. Many good reasons NOT to make a law out of this proposal, but it can happen anyway, if the public does not react.
Comment has been collapsed.
But it most likely will come back in two months after the summer break. During the break the EU Parliament wants to make some revisions and then there will be another vote on that new version.
I'll write my representives again, something hopefully every concerned EU citizen will do to keep the pressure high.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's how the system works. Their intent was to tax megacorps like Google, Facebook etc but as clueless politicians they managed to ban catpics instead. "I have never gotten this many contacts from people about anything before" says a Finnish MEP.
Comment has been collapsed.
It didn't pass. Don't even know how it even came to a vote considering the privacy issues involved
The EU's dodgy Article 13 copyright directive has been rejected
More debating in September to make big movie distributors, who donate to politicians, happy ,after which the project should die a quiet death in the maze of scheduling and bureaucracy
Comment has been collapsed.
Another Internet breaking EU proposal trying to stop US megacorps from selling all your user information to anyone with money and US law enforcement from having free access to everything without any cause.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
6 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by Wasari
710 Comments - Last post 26 minutes ago by xargu
36 Comments - Last post 28 minutes ago by Gamy7
1,947 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by Gamy7
31 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Alxsero
5 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by gaudigabriels
22 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by afa1425
520 Comments - Last post 37 seconds ago by Wildstorm
4 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by thoughtfulhippo
2,059 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by HazelHazel
24 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by cassioht
39 Comments - Last post 12 minutes ago by herbesdeprovence
366 Comments - Last post 15 minutes ago by Kyrrelin
171 Comments - Last post 16 minutes ago by Addriano13
I just noticed this thing(more about it in the reddit link).
I haven't seen anyone post about it here so I'm making a topic about it just in case.
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/8ngizt/save_your_internet_delete_article_13/
Apparently "The European Parliament Legal Affairs Committee" voted for Article 13, which can be used to censor literally ALL content on the internet before it even gets uploaded for public view. I have no idea what all this is about to be honest, anyone with more knowledge feel free to post.
Comment has been collapsed.