Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #Article17
Most recents (14)
The European Commission takes legal action against 11 countries for failing to transpose the #CopyrightDirective. The case will be heard at the Court of Justice of the EU.
ec.europa.eu/commission/pre…
ec.europa.eu/commission/pre…
These two Directives aim to modernise copyright rules for consumers and creators to make the most of the digital world. They protect rightholders from different sectors, stimulating the creation and circulation of more high-value content. 2/3 #copyrightdirective #article15
They bring greater choice of content for users by lowering transaction costs and facilitating the distribution of radio and television programmes across the EU. 3/3 #copyrightdirective #article17
As antitrust awakens from its 40-year, Reagan-induced coma, there's both surging hope that we will tame corporate power, and a backlash that says that antitrust is the wrong framework for reducing the might of giant corporations.
1/
1/
If you'd like an unrolled version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
pluralistic.net/2021/08/31/and…
2/
pluralistic.net/2021/08/31/and…
2/
Competition itself won't solve problems like digital surveillance, pollution or labor exploitation. If we fetishize competition for its own sake, we could end up with a competition to see who can violate our human rights most efficiently.
pluralistic.net/2021/08/24/ill…
3/
pluralistic.net/2021/08/24/ill…
3/
Disappointing news: Advocate General of @EUCourtPress does not recommend the annulation of #Article17. Instead, the provision must be interpreted in a fundamental rights-compliant manner to ensure that only manifestly illegal content gets blocked. A Thread.
The opinion is not a judgment. If the Court follows the AG’s recommendation, #Article17 would survive, but it would apply differently than rightsholders hoped for. Member States will have to make sure that legal content is protected from #uploadfilters.
Some Member States have already implemented #Article17 into national law. All but Germany have completely failed to put in place measures to prevent blocking of legal content. Those implementations are likely to violate the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Last week, "Marina" - a piano teacher who publishes free lessons her Piano Keys Youtube channel - celebrated her fifth anniversary by announcing that she was quitting Youtube because her meager wages were being stolen by fraudsters.
1/
1/
(If you'd like an unrolled version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:)
pluralistic.net/2021/05/08/cop…
pluralistic.net/2021/05/08/cop…
Marina posted a video with a snatch of her performance of Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata," published in 1801. The composition is firmly in the public domain, and the copyright in the performance is firmly Marina's, but it still triggered Youtube's automated copyright filter.
2/
2/
The @EU_Commission may abandon central user rights safeguards against #uploadfilters in its upcoming #copyright guidance on implementation of #Article17! Civil Society groups including @communia_eu @EDRi @EFF are raising the alarm in an open letter today. What happened? A thread.
Last year, @EU_Commission published a draft guidance that said that only obviously copyright-infringing uploads could be blocked by #uploadfilters, trying to convince the European Court of Justice not to strike down #Article17 for violating fundamental rights.
The Court held a hearing on the Polish complaint against #Article17 in November, where the Commission promised that legal uploads, such as parodies or quotations, would be protected. verfassungsblog.de/luxembourg-to-…
I've moved my old #Mastodon-account to another smaller instance to hopefully help keeping instances small so they hopefully never fall under the new insane german (and possibly soon EU-wide) copyright-laws
which f.e. include #Uploadfilters and 125kB-filesize-limits for images big platforms like #Twitter will soon have to implement. You can find my new Mastodon-account under layer8.space/@ChaoticHuman though I will probably be mostly posting in German there
because the already mentioned new German copyright-laws are the main-reason why I became active on #Mastodon again
In Mar 2019, the EU approved the new #CopyrightDirective by an absurdly slim margin (it passed by 5 votes and later 10 MEPs said they got confused and pressed the wrong button; due to procedural rules, despite an amended total showing a majority AGAINST, it still passed).
1/
1/
Specifically, the part that passed through this bureaucratic, incoherent nonsense was #Article13 (now confusingly called #Article17), which imposed a duty on online platforms to stop their users from infringing copyright.
2/
2/
This proposal has a bizarre history (everything about this is bizarre). It started as a mandate for copyright filters (like Youtube's ContentID, which cost $100m and counting). Then Axel Voss, the MEP in charge of it, said it absolutely was NOT a proposal to mandate filters.
3/
3/
The entertainment industry has started a campaign to re-write the history of Europe's most controversial #copyright law, #Article17, the infamous #uploadfilter provision. The goal: to bully governments & the @EU_Commission into simply ignoring all user rights that we fought for.
Last year the EU adopted #Article17, which requires platforms to magically prevent #copyright infringement before it happens, while leaving all legal content online, and without generally monitoring user uploads. This is impossible, of course.
Most national governments are waiting for guidance from the @EU_Commission to help them make sense of #Article17. The Commission asked for input on a document with some basic principles, my response with @edri & @freiheitsrechte can be found here:
Copyright filters are now applied to live streams on Youtube.
What could possibly go wrong?
#article17 [was: #article13]
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/20…
What could possibly go wrong?
#article17 [was: #article13]
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/20…
More in this Copyright Maximalist Schadenfreude series can be found here:
I want EU citizens to know what happened in their name. The @EU_Commission acted as the long arm of multinational entertainment companies to block progressive #copyright reform in South Africa that would have helped millions of users & authors. A thread.
@EU_Commission On 18 February 2019, entertainment industry trade groups IFPI (music), MPA (Hollywood), FEP (publishers) etc sent a letter to the EU Commission, asking them to intervene in the ongoing South African copyright reform on their behalf. asktheeu.org/en/request/791…
Their claim was that the reform would hurt creators, but actual creators were of a different view. Aside from introducing #fairuse, access to books for blind people and those who can't afford textbooks, the bill would also drastically improve the bargaining position of authors.
During the pandemic, classical musicians and orchestras are reliant on streaming their performances to maintain their profile and solicit donations. That's a problem, because the platforms' copyright bots HATE classical music.
washingtonpost.com/entertainment/…
1/
washingtonpost.com/entertainment/…
1/
Once a record label like Sony Music or Naxos claims a performance that they have released, the bots scour the services for anything that sounds even remotely like that performance and either deletes it, mutes it, or steals the money it generates.
2/
2/
And on the platforms, users are considered guilty until proven innocent. An automated takedown is virtually instantaneous, while a human review that reverses it can take TWENTY EIGHT MONTHS.
pluralistic.net/2020/05/17/che…
3/
pluralistic.net/2020/05/17/che…
3/
Well now, that is quite a shock.
#copyrightdirective and thus #linktax and #article17 copyright filters will *not* enter into UK law:
parliament.uk/business/publi…
#copyrightdirective and thus #linktax and #article17 copyright filters will *not* enter into UK law:
parliament.uk/business/publi…
"the United Kingdom will not be required to implement the Directive, and the Government has no plans to do so. Any future changes to the UK copyright framework will be considered as part of the usual domestic policy process."
In other news, the Directive's #linktax is in a quagmire in France and Germany, and the Commission has to create guidance as to how to do filters.
So maybe it's not so surprising that a deregulatory government would steer clear of regulation that's clearly going wrong.
So maybe it's not so surprising that a deregulatory government would steer clear of regulation that's clearly going wrong.
1/ Hogan Lovells (HL - @hoganlovells) ‘Global Media and Communications Watch’ blog examines #Article13/#Article17 of the #EU #CopyrightDirective hlmediacomms.com/2019/04/01/dsm… #SaveYourInternet #Artikel13 #Artikel17
2/ HL reminds everyone that #Article13/#Article17 “makes some online services primarily liable for copyright infringement in relation to the acts of their users” #CopyrightDirective #SaveYourInternet #Artikel13 #Artikel17
3/ HL points out that “while the online content sharing services are urged to conclude licensing agreements with right holders or get their authorisation, it is expressly stated that rightholders are free to refuse to grant authorisation” #SaveYourInternet #Article13 #Article17
[Thread] Mais qui s’occupe d’article13[.]org, salué hier par l’ @Elysee en soutien à la #CopyrightDirective ? #Article11 #article13 #Artikel17 #article17 cf nextinpact.com/news/107733-le… 1/9
Le whois n’est pas bavard : le nom a été déposé chez Gandi par une personne physique dont l’identité est par défaut protégée. Merci le #RGPD ! 2/9
Les mentions légales sont d'une transparence relative. On sait juste que le site a été créé par "EuropeForCreators". Aucune adresse, aucun n° de téléphone, rien.
article13.org/about-us
article13.org/legals 3/9
article13.org/about-us
article13.org/legals 3/9
