Article 13: the copyright strikes back!

Captaaainuniverse

Captaaainuniverse

Time-Traveller
download (1).jpeg
Article 13 will give copyright holders the right to zap down anything shared on the internet. It passes tommorrow, if things really are that grim, then memes, links videos and other things can not be shared without express permission from the copyright holder, it will limit virtually everything you do on the internet, if it comes to that, what I'd like to aim at the staff of this site is are they prepared for it? What will the site look like, as much of the site deals with reviews and news of some things that already have iffy licenses?

I wouldn't really like for things to feel more restricted than they already are, in general, I think we've seen plenty of dystopian and cyberpunk films to know where this kind of stuff leads
 
We'll be dealing with it if and when it passes, so we have no particular plans just yet. We'll have to look at what to do when it's closer to implementation and we've got more of a concrete idea of what it will look like.
 
This is laughably unworkable, and seems like something the politicians came up with just to satisfy their corporate paymasters that they're doing something to protect their precious IPs without any real expectation it's going to work or that anyone is going to take the blindest bit of notice. Plus, I feel like the authorities will only care about this in relation to the big social media players, bookface and tw*tter will have to try and implement it in some form (which might also be pretty funny to watch) but somewhere like AUKN for example... Do you really think anyone is going to care? I dread to think how much it would cost to literally police the entire internet, and I don't think the EU is prepared to pay for that. If it actually screws up the web I'll just go to the deep web, as I imagine would a lot of websites.

Also if it's an EU regulation, probably won't apply to us soon anyway, will it?
 
ayase said:
This is laughably unworkable, and seems like something the politicians came up with just to satisfy their corporate paymasters that they're doing something to protect their precious IPs without any real expectation it's going to work or that anyone is going to take the blindest bit of notice. Plus, I feel like the authorities will only care about this in relation to the big social media players, bookface and tw*tter will have to try and implement it in some form (which might also be pretty funny to watch) but somewhere like AUKN for example... Do you really think anyone is going to care? I dread to think how much it would cost to literally police the entire internet, and I don't think the EU is prepared to pay for that. If it actually screws up the web I'll just go to the deep web, as I imagine would a lot of websites.

Also if it's an EU regulation, probably won't apply to us soon anyway, will it?
Click to expand...
Could be kind of funny to see just how much they’d be willing to waste on something like this though. Yknow they need to fill their money spent on complete nonsense quota.
 
ayase said:
This is laughably unworkable, and seems like something the politicians came up with just to satisfy their corporate paymasters that they're doing something to protect their precious IPs without any real expectation it's going to work or that anyone is going to take the blindest bit of notice. Plus, I feel like the authorities will only care about this in relation to the big social media players, bookface and tw*tter will have to try and implement it in some form (which might also be pretty funny to watch) but somewhere like AUKN for example... Do you really think anyone is going to care? I dread to think how much it would cost to literally police the entire internet, and I don't think the EU is prepared to pay for that. If it actually screws up the web I'll just go to the deep web, as I imagine would a lot of websites.

Also if it's an EU regulation, probably won't apply to us soon anyway, will it?
Click to expand...
I would say much of this is obvious, and don't be afraid to mention those pretty household names.
I don't want to sound so punk about it, but big entities like that are powerful enough to change the direction of an economy - business forms around bigger business, at some point the government will think only of a cooperations interests and not the end user.
I don't think it's a move for government control, just for more cooperate control. And it will involve and army of bots so it isn't as pricey as you may think. I'm in work so I don't know if it's passed now (It's passed today) thing is those making this law don't know how sharing benefits some of those cooperate entities, communities like this wouldn't exist. In the 70s and 80s most of the uks exposure to anime was from bootleggers, patch and parrot people pretty much forced streaming to become a thing, now streaming makes a killing in the industry. I'm not advocating for crime, it's just that sometimes a better service is born from legal loopholes.
I'm gonna feel a bit soapboxy here but I doubt the community or the site would exist if we weren't allowed to share things, no one would be able to know if they like something if they can't see it, or hell, worst case, can't mention it. It's going to turn into something like the itchy and scratchy case from the Simpsons; "you take away our right to steal ideas, where are they going to come from?"
 
I'm sensing an air of solidarity from the troops *waves a flag with a pixelated backwards "V" and swings inflateable mallet*

FOR THE INTERNET!
 
just putting this vid up as a bit of an update to it
apparently there's still a chance to appeal a vote against it before it becomes law, I thought today would decide it but it's more about whether it would have a closer look or something, if it passes an official vote it could be about 2 years before it's officially law, it could also be much sooner, I'm not sure how it works. anyway, the guy in the vid seems to be the only one covering it like this
 
Captaaainuniverse said:
I would say much of this is obvious, and don't be afraid to mention those pretty household names.
I don't want to sound so punk about it, but big entities like that are powerful enough to change the direction of an economy - business forms around bigger business, at some point the government will think only of a cooperations interests and not the end user.
I don't think it's a move for government control, just for more cooperate control.
Click to expand...
No argument here, this is definitely corporate lobbying at work here, not in the interests of the people (and uh, I was just being insulting to social media there, you can replace the "i" with something else...)

Captaaainuniverse said:
And it will involve and army of bots so it isn't as pricey as you may think. I'm in work so I don't know if it's passed now (It's passed today) thing is those making this law don't know how sharing benefits some of those cooperate entities, communities like this wouldn't exist. In the 70s and 80s most of the uks exposure to anime was from bootleggers, patch and parrot people pretty much forced streaming to become a thing, now streaming makes a killing in the industry. I'm not advocating for crime, it's just that sometimes a better service is born from legal loopholes.
I'm gonna feel a bit soapboxy here but I doubt the community or the site would exist if we weren't allowed to share things, no one would be able to know if they like something if they can't see it, or hell, worst case, can't mention it. It's going to turn into something like the itchy and scratchy case from the Simpsons; "you take away our right to steal ideas, where are they going to come from?"
Click to expand...
I certainly don't like the fact it's even being proposed Cap, and it's probably a good idea to use the tools we have to oppose it:

Save Your Internet – Delete article 13

As dodgy as this legislation is and as much as I want to see it fail, I do think a lot of the things people are afraid of happening can never actually come to pass, at least not without specifically taking away people's fair use for parody rights. At which point it would not just affect internet memes but also things like political satire in general - If it gets to the point where you can't say, dress up as and make fun of of Angela Merkel without Angela Merkel's permission because she owns the wholesale rights to her likeness, I think a hell of a lot of entertainers would stand up and denounce it as authoritarian squashing of freedom of speech, which certainly wouldn't help the EU improve its image among the people of Europe.
 
ayase said:
No argument here, this is definitely corporate lobbying at work here, not in the interests of the people (and uh, I was just being insulting to social media there, you can replace the "i" with something else...)


I certainly don't like the fact it's even being proposed Cap, and it's probably a good idea to use the tools we have to oppose it:

Save Your Internet – Delete article 13

As dodgy as this legislation is and as much as I want to see it fail, I do think a lot of the things people are afraid of happening can never actually come to pass, at least not without specifically taking away people's fair use for parody rights. At which point it would not just affect internet memes but also things like political satire in general - If it gets to the point where you can't say, dress up as and make fun of of Angela Merkel without Angela Merkel's permission because she owns the wholesale rights to her likeness, I think a hell of a lot of entertainers would stand up and denounce it as authoritarian squashing of freedom of speech, which certainly wouldn't help the EU improve its image among the people of Europe.
Click to expand...
Fair use is a bit of a funny one. I'm no lawyer but from what I covered in my graphic design diploma, it states that so long as theres no impingment on the profit intended by the original copyright owner, fair use extends to things like personal use (I dunno I guess if you want to just print some art/quotes and stick it on your wall as a poster), scholarly endeavours, research, journalism, without needing express written permission from the original copyright owner.

I wonder if it would affect things like the art sites (such as DeviantArt) as well, where lots of users like to create fan-art; some even post their stuff without acknowledging the original creator. Usually so long as you have some sort of disclaimer , e.g (Character copyright to x; artwork copyright to me; created for entertainment purposes only - not for profit), then you're good.
 
~AyaMachi~ said:
I wonder if it would affect things like the art sites (such as DeviantArt) as well, where lots of users like to create fan-art; some even post their stuff without acknowledging the original creator. Usually so long as you have some sort of disclaimer , e.g (Character copyright to x; artwork copyright to me; created for entertainment purposes only - not for profit), then you're good.
Click to expand...
I mean that brings up another good point - What companies would actually want these rules enforced when fan created content is often a big driver to get people interested in their products? I think most wouldn't, and those that did would only get a bad name for themselves with fan communities.
 
~AyaMachi~ said:
I wonder if it would affect things like the art sites (such as DeviantArt) as well, where lots of users like to create fan-art; some even post their stuff without acknowledging the original creator. Usually so long as you have some sort of disclaimer , e.g (Character copyright to x; artwork copyright to me; created for entertainment purposes only - not for profit), then you're good.
Click to expand...
They would likely employ bots to strike down anything featuring copyright characters, props (like weapons unique to a series) powers and other such things that are part of a copyright. These bots cannot distinguish between someone sharing a picture of say, zero two or someone's artwork featuring zero two, nor does the article show anything that will have the bots developed with such a capability.
If this becomes law, there will be no more bad*** female saiyans, no more froppy fanart A froppy not shared is a sad froppy
pp,550x550.jpg

cue the most depressing ribbit you've ever heard
 
Captaaainuniverse said:
They would likely employ bots to strike down anything featuring copyright characters, props (like weapons unique to a series) powers and other such things that are part of a copyright. These bots cannot distinguish between someone sharing a picture of say, zero two or someone's artwork featuring zero two, nor does the article show anything that will have the bots developed with such a capability.
Click to expand...
I think bots that can identify characters in fan art are currently in the realm of science fiction, and taking those down would be massively overstepping the boundaries of fair use laws. Also the sites in question would need to agree to these authority bots being given access to and the ability to censor content on their sites, and if they're not hosted in the EU why would they?

I do see this law as being a potential issue, but mainly with things like screencaps of copyrighted content - I don't think there's any way in hell this law could be used against fan art and I don't think any company would want to take down fan art of their properties. Most already rightly embrace it as people showing love for their work, not see it as a legal threat.
 
Back
Top