Jump to content

Article 13 Lobbying Efforts Clash Before Crucial Copyright Filters Vote


steven36

Recommended Posts

In two days time, a pivotal vote will take place in the European Parliament, one that could change the direction of copyright enforcement in the EU. Framed around the so-called "Value Gap", Article 13 aims to force Internet platforms to "play fair" on licensing rates with record labels. Ahead of the vote, hundreds of groups and organizations are facing off in a final clash of the causes.

 

https://s7d3.turboimg.net/sp/db34c95ccf4b0f4b8d8c6a478eb82f13/eu-copyright.jpg

 

Due to unlicensed copyrighted content being made available on YouTube and similar platforms, millions of citizens around the world are able to consume the same at rates close to free.

 

This, of course, is a situation that’s completely unacceptable to the content industries, the record labels in particular. While sites like YouTube compensate them for views of authorized content, the existence of unlicensed content uploaded by users means that the Google-owned video giant gains an unfair negotiating position, or so the claims go.

 

Soon, however, the labels hope that the free content ride will be over. In an attempt to plug the so-called “Value Gap”, they have lobbied strongly for new legislation (Article 13) that would see user-uploaded content platforms compelled to install filters to detect infringing content before it’s even made available to the public.

 

Two weeks ago, the Legal Affairs Committee of the Parliament (JURI) voted on Article 13. With a 15 to 10 majority, the proposal of Rapporteur Voss was adopted. This means that the plans move ahead in their current form, despite massive and persistent public outcry.

 

This Thursday, a plenary vote on the JURI mandate will take place, so it’s no surprise that both sides of the debate are rallying to ensure that their voices are heard. In recent days, more than 80 creative sector groups and companies called on MEPs to support their position, that “playing fair” is the only way forward.

 

Billions and billions at stake…

https://s7d2.turboimg.net/sp/1baeceae61f2ce0773f3a90531eb7c6b/77694.jpg

 

“We represent 4.5% of EU GDP and 12 million European jobs. We are the heart and soul of Europe’s plurality and rich identities. On July 5 we ask for you to back the mandate adopted by JURI on 20 June which is the result of long and intense negotiations,” they wrote.

 

“There is a cynical campaign from tech companies flooding the inboxes of MEPs with scaremongering that the copyright directive would be the end of the internet. Please note that this is the 20th anniversary of their first claim that copyright provisions would break the internet. This has never happened. We need an Internet that is fair and sustainable for all.”

 

The signatories to the appeal represent countless multi-billion dollar companies whose interests will no doubt cause MEPs to sit up and listen. However, opponents of Article 13 are not sitting idly and hoping for the best. In an open letter published this week by Copybuzz, more than 145 organizations hit back, warning MEPs that Article 13 represents a serious threat to online freedom.

 

Supported by groups including EFF, Creative Commons, COMMUNIA Association, Public Knowledge and Wikimedia, the letter highlights objections that the proposed legislation threatens innovation by making it more difficult for startups to go about their business without fear of litigation.

 

“We represent startups which generate 9.5% of total European GDP and 2.5% of the labour market. We are the innovators that have chosen to embrace the future digital enables rather than grasp at the past. We are the believers of healthy competition, where barriers to entry should not be raised by poorly thought through regulation, to the detriment of millions of European innovators,” they write.

 

“We represent human rights and digital rights who defend the core values of what has made the European Union’s democratic model thrive. We believe that our fundamental rights are priceless and we advocate for strong safeguards when fundamental rights are at risk, as in this case.

 

“By defending a democratic and open internet, we defend the same internet that allows human rights defenders to expose actions from oppressive governments and monopolies, while allowing a wide range of business models to enjoy their fundamental freedom to conduct a business.”

 

The groups warn that Article 13 poses a threat to education and access to information and will seriously damage the capacity to improve software via hubs that develop connected products.

“Because of all of the above, we urge you to vote for a public debate on the Directive and, therefore, against the negotiating mandate,” they conclude.

 

With the vote just two days away the pressure is likely to continue, with both sides digging in. At this stage there’s only one thing they can agree on – that the imposition of upload filters will change everything.

Who that will positively and negatively affect will be for history to decide.

 

The full letter can be found here (pdf)

 

Source

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, steven36 said:

This, of course, is a situation that’s completely unacceptable to the content industries, the record labels in particular. While sites like YouTube compensate them for views of authorized content, the existence of unlicensed content uploaded by users means that the Google-owned video giant gains an unfair negotiating position, or so the claims go.

 

A lot of companies gains a LOT OF MONEY and they said "this is unacceptable" :( 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

straycat19
6 hours ago, steven36 said:

By defending a democratic and open internet, we defend the same internet that allows human rights defenders to expose actions from oppressive governments and monopolies

 

Their argument has no basis in the context in which the law was predicated.  Human rights and copyrights are not in the same bowl.  It's like comparing apples and bananas.  At some point in time all copyrighted material will be banned from the internet unless you pay to access it.  Whether that happens in our lifetime or not is the only question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, straycat19 said:

 

Their argument has no basis in the context in which the law was predicated.  Human rights and copyrights are not in the same bowl.  It's like comparing apples and bananas.  At some point in time all copyrighted material will be banned from the internet unless you pay to access it.  Whether that happens in our lifetime or not is the only question.

But the problem is  they dont  care about you're law they follow the law of the jungle baby, just like a pimp or kingpin who runs some kind of illegal businesses for the law to mean anything to them they have to be busted 1st    Copyright in the USA  means very little every since was little kids are parents bought us devices to copy there works . I got my 1st cassette recorder when i was 4 then latter on VCRs came out . 

 

You think people are going to change once they invented the www?  If they blocked TPB everywhere id just crank up the TOR browser and still get on there. But the USA never even blocked the 1st site like they have in the EU. The reason California try to adopt the EUs laws is because the EU sold out to Hollywood long ago and they cant get anything done in the USA  about copyright so they get countries in the EU to do there biding so id expect no  less from that state. And by the way they already used YouTube piracy filters to violate peoples human rights like freedom of speech  sending out dmcas  to have there channels removed  just because they didn't like what they said . you need to read a few topics down about it... Talking about something is not breaking any law. Even the president of the USA dont like Hollywood or BIG Tech of California but only reason he dont put most of them crooks in jail is because he dont like Government overreach .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, straycat19 said:

Human rights and copyrights

See here

Copyright law could put end to net memes

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44412025

 

Just today a federal judge said  it's fair use to copy pictures off  the internet .

https://petapixel.com/2018/07/02/court-rules-copying-photos-found-on-internet-is-fair-use/

 

The EU laws are not the USA  laws even, so you're version of the law is not the same in the next state, let alone  overseas. Hollywood must hate that because they sent out DMCAs  for people using movie posters and pictures all the time. But then again Hollywood  is in  California were they dont follow the laws of the Land no way they need  to move that state over to the EU or somewhere. Just like Theranos Founder Elizabeth Holmes Indicted on Fraud Charges  bunch of crooks name one company who are not in Silicon Valley? :P

 

Movie Star from California  Smoking  weed that's illegal in the  USA by federal law  trying to tell me its OK to get high but you better not download my movie what a joke!  :lol:

 

If copyright don't nothing to do with human rights why did the internet have that blackout that day in 2012  that caused them not to pass  SOPA and PIPA in the  USA ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA

 

Quote

 

Don't waste effort by opposing the EU copyright changes - let the gross stupidity of MEPs and of the inner cabal of officialdom reap their deserved political rewards

 

Perhaps the simplest option for people opposed to the EU's latest foray into absurdity is to let matters follow their course. Just like other attempts by governments to place unpopular, and generally unworkable, restrictions upon the Internet and related technologies, this will end as a shambles.

 

Never mind the ordinary 'consumer', it is a variety of businesses which will suffer and express their pain loudly. The pace of disregard for copyright shall continue unabated among the general population. Copyright cartels shall, as ever, moan and demand more.

 

The delightful feature of this coming bedlam is its sheer scale. Twenty eight EU member countries will be required to ensure the new rules apply within their legal jurisdictions. As usual, member countries will follow the new strictures with considerably varying diligence.

 

The final cock-up shall be monumental. A huge and economically important swathe of the world's nations will be nursing chaos and suffering as a result. Although the EU may, briefly, become copyright nirvana this will be at the cost of multiple businesses, particularly those engaged with the Internet and with information technology innovation. For them, the grass is greener elsewhere.

 

Meanwhile, in the USA things will go along as usual. No disruption and great prospect of business concerns uprooting from Europe and settling in the US. The irony shall eventually impact upon the awareness of the EU's kakistocracy. The main beneficiaries of the changes are US 'content' production and distribution industries. Yet, there's not the slightest prospect of the USA imposing similar restrictions on its 327 million population.

-----

Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 international license.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...