I felt uneasy when I read the news today. Is filtering really the right way? I doubt it. No one knows exactly what consequences this brings, and I’m not having a good feeling about it, sadly :/
Want to support my work? Check the “Patreon” link on my blog!
WILL BE BLOCKED BECAUSE of SOME OLD POLITICIANS “that know the youth and the internet the best then anyone else” IN THE SENATE THINKING THEY KNOW BETTER SHUTTING DOWN YOUTUBE AND OTHER SOCIAL PLATFORMS FOR ME AND PEOPLE LIVING IN THE EU FOREVER!
PLEASEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE I REPEAT THE ARTICLE HAS BEEN CHANGED COMPLETELY NO FUCKING JOKE GUYS! LAST TIME IT WAS ALL ABOUT PROTECTION NOW THEY ADDED SOME STUPID STUFF AND THEY WILL BE TAKING AWAY MY YOUTUBE; SOCIAL MEDIAS AND EVERYTHING!
PLEASE SIGN UP IN THIS PETITION IF WE DON´T HIT 5 MILLION GERMANY AND SO MANY EUROPE COUNTRIES WILL LOSE THEIR SOCIAL AND MORE!
SHARE THIS POST AND SIGN UP AND VOTE THE MORE THAN BETTER! Let’s SHOW THESE OLD PEOPLE THAT YOUTUBE, TUMBLR, INSTAGRAM AND ALL THESE GREAT OTHER SITES AREN´T FUCKING USELESS AND SHET BECAUSE THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT SOCIAL MEDIA IS! INSTEAD OF TAKING THESE PRECIOUS THINGS THEY SHOULD WORRY ABOUT OTHER.STUFF ( Migrants, new school system) BUT NAH THEY WANT TO TAKE AWAY OUR SOCIAL MEDIAS
I REPEAT article 13 HAS COMPLETED CHANGED AND IN A FEW MONTHS IT WILL TAKE AWAY OUR SOCIAL media LIKE TUMBLR AND YOUTUBE HERE IN EUROPE PLEASE SIGN UP FOR US GUYS I BEG YOU!
PLEASE HELP US GUYS I BEG YOU and PLEASE! reblog IT ISN´T ANYMORE A JOKE THEY HAVE COMPLETELY TURNED THE ARTICLE AROUND FOR THE WORST THIS WEEK!
YO NON-EUROPEANS CAN ALSO SIGN GET IN LINE FOR YOUR EURPOEAN HOMIES GUYS CMON
PLEASE HELP THEM
Yo OP you’re a real piece of artwork, ya know that?
So, first of all, this is pure hyperbole, but i’ll get to that in the end. What I find especially bad is that you only link to the change.org petition that is really vaguely worded.
These above links have on the left side the original text and on the right the most updated version as of september 12.
All good? Nice, let’s take a look inside them!
TL;DR: The Directive’s new amendments on Articles 11 and 13 have actually enstrenghtened consumer rights and defused to a large degree the ticking time bomb that was the bots. Also, the EU has no Senate!
So, first off, Article 11 - the apocalyptic attitude of the OP is already disputed because we see right in Section 1a that, and to quote:
“
The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall not prevent legitimate private and non-commercial use of press publications by individual users.
“
Which means, if you’re not making money off it, then it’s all good - you can share it online, or keep it for yourself on your phone or computer.
This is further corroborated by Sections 2a, 4 and 4a, which in turn talk about sharing hyperlinks (aka links from websites), how long the rights are retained for commercial use (which number has been reduced from 20 years to just 5 years - a bit much, but not apocalyptic again), and about the Members of the EU having to accomodate for these compensations.
To quote again:
“
2a. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall not extend to mere hyperlinks which are accompanied by individual words.
“
4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 5 years after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication. The right referred to in paragraph 1 shall not apply with retroactive effect.
“
4a. Member States shall ensure that authors receive an appropriate share of the additional revenues press publishers receive for the use of a press publication by information society service providers. “
This is a good time to remind that Articles 11 and 13 and the entire legislations ARE NOT LAWS. They are DIRECTIVES, which is basically EU law from what i know for making a list of rules that member countries can check, see if they comply, and then choose for themselves if they find their current laws adequate or need to update them to fit the definitions set by the directive. For more on that, check an actual law student’s post on the subject here - she honestly tells it much better than i could ever hope to do so:
Right, now onto Article 13. So, the big important boi here is Section 2b, which, to quote a brief excerpt:
“
Members States shall ensure that online content sharing service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place effective and expeditious complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case the cooperation referred to in paragraph 2a leads to unjustified removals of their content. Any complaint filed under such mechanisms shall be processed without undue delay and be subject to human review. Right holders shall reasonably justify their decisions to avoid arbitrary dismissal of complaints.
“
THIS RIGHT HERE PROTECTS YOUR RIGHTS FROM CORPORATIONS FROM CLAIMING IT AS THEIR OWN.
It also serves another purpose as it demands that all content that has been claimed MUST be reviewed by a HUMAN PERSON, not a bot. This is monumental news, for the mere fact that what we feared with Article 13 was that the directives was gonna utilize bots like YouTube and Google do exclusively, and mandate they be used. This section basically says “yo, whatever you use, if something is claimed, you gotta have a human review”.
These views are further strengthened by the rest of Section 2, 2a and 3, which goes in length about how current streaming and video/content-hosting services’ code of conducts will be enforced. This is where the argument about how the EU will go full dictatorship and will censor the internet falls apart. To quote briefly again:
“ 2. Licensing agreements which are concluded by online content sharing service providers with right holders for the acts of communication referred to in paragraph 1, shall cover the liability for works uploaded by the users of such online content sharing services in line with the terms and conditions set out in the licensing agreement, provided that such users do not act for commercial purposes.
“ 2a. Member States shall provide that where right holders do not wish to conclude licensing agreements, online content sharing service providers and right holders shall cooperate in good faith in order to ensure that unauthorised protected works or other subject matter are not available on their services. Cooperation between online content service providers and right holders shall not lead to preventing the availability of non-infringing works or other protected subject matter, including those covered by an exception or limitation to copyright.
“ 3. […] When defining best practices, special account shall be taken of fundamental rights, the use of exceptions and limitations as well as ensuring that the burden on SMEs remains appropriate and that automated blocking of content is avoided.
“
So, in conclusion, Article 13 and Article 11 is not the devil it once was, and its recent amendment has made it a lot more user-friendly!
Now, I wanna address the original post directly, cuz the language used is very telling. First of all, it’s all caps, so, unless you’re @factsinallcaps, your credibility is automatically lowered imo. Secondly, the lack of direct links to either articles, or even news pieces from websites about net neutrality is very telling. The fact that only the link to the change.org petition is linked is highly suspicious.
Now, let’s go into details; First of all, the EU has no Senate. This isn’t the United States. And there was never any talk about shutting down social media - this is not a situation like in Turkey, where YouTube has been taken down and replaced with a local one.
The wording especially of the final phrase, “
INSTEAD OF TAKING THESE PRECIOUS THINGS THEY SHOULD WORRY ABOUT OTHER.STUFF ( Migrants, new school system) BUT NAH THEY WANT TO TAKE AWAY OUR SOCIAL MEDIAS
“, also has me severely troubled. The EU cannot implement a pan-european EU-licensed new school system. That’s just not how it functions! This is up to each individual country comprising the EU to make up.
Also the migrants crisis and the way they’re thrown nonchalant here reads like a very reactionary right-wing talking point. And this is a big deal when it comes to the Article 13 debacle - the talking points have been hijacked by anti-eu personas (like Computing Forever) who espouse views that are anti-semitic, islamophobic, sexist, transmisogynist and racist. So, despite Article 13 being a really obvious sticking point and in need of proper debate, especially after the tragedy that was the rollback of net neutrality in the United States, we had the discourse surrounding the Article and what it does poisoned by Far-Right discourse, which in turn has produced the meme about the EU coming to censor all memes and, in this post’s case, take down all social media.
And it’s sad.
And I’m tired of it.
Now, what is happening with Article 13 right now? Because, remember, these amendments happened in early September, and it is November the 8th right now, 40 minutes past midnight in Greece. So, according to Julia Reid, the head of the EU pirate party and overal extreme badass is in negotiations with the rest of the EU council, discussing further amendments, and judging from her twitter, things are going pretty good!
(quoting the tweet in case you can’t open the link:
Good news, Council did not insist on its wording on the relationship with existing #copyright exceptions in Article 17a today. It looks like we may be able to solve this problem in the next round of negotiations. #FixCopyright )
(I’ve never looked into Article 17, so I can’t speak about that, but I trust her)
And that’s about it! Votes are set to come in like early 2019, which will finalize the Articles, and then the directive will be shipped to each member state, where each parliament will decide on how to implement those articles
Don’t fall for the reactionaries tumblr, and research before you reblog! The current version has 20k notes and it tells a grossly misleading version of the Directive, one influenced by anti-EU, far-right reactionary elements.
And sorry for the long post! Have a good evening ^_^
please do reblog this version of the post if you see it, cuz the post has 30k notes and it’s still misdirecting people as to how art13 has changed
jesus christ finally someone caught this dang misinformed person.
Yes it has changed and the changes are a step in the right direction!
Glad to see people calling out fear-mongering bullshit.
Article 13 has been approved by EU. It’s worse than Net Neutrality has ever been. I don’t even know if we will have any access to Tumblr, Pinterest, Ao3 or even Instagram. Memes are probably dead, just like reactions, fanfictions and gifsets. Everyone in EU is in danger that they will not have access to their favorite sites. But I haven’t seen a SINGLE post about it on my dash because Americans doesn’t give a damn.
Also, I’m in Europe and ngl, had no idea this was even an article up for debate let alone it being fucking passed.
Don’t panic! This was expected at this stage and it is only the beginning. If you are a European and feel passionate about this, please keep on reading and help!
So what has happened so far … the Commission has drafted up a long overdue copyright reform. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/procedure/EN/2016_280 It contains a lot of good, and some bad: mainly Article 11 and 13.
This was put forward as a whole to the European Parlament, where it was voted down on the 5th of July 2018
This meant, this will not go through the fast way, and will be subject to scrutiny and change.
The Commission made some alterations https://eur-lex.europa.eu/procedure/EN/2016_280 and put it forward again. If Parlament would have voted it down again, it probably would have meant back to the drawing board, but most people (including me) agree that Europe does need copyright reform, so on the second vote it passed the first step:
So what happens now?
This will now go into what is called the Trilogue, where Commission, Parlament and representatives of all national governments will sit together to make alterations until everybody is happy implementing the regulation.
This means we can now influence this via our MEPs and our National Government!
In countries that are red your government is likely to support Article 13.
What to do now?
There are a lot of organisations that organise actions against article 13. Check out their websites and get in touch with your MEP or local government and let them know you are unhappy about this.
… and many many more, just google to find one in your country.
Also, as @asthesea-breezehitsmylungs pointed out, a lot of people are not aware of this going on. So make them aware! Share the memes and point them to the petitions. And don’t just complain how shit this is, get in touch with your politicians!
If you don’t know what this means, it’s basically then end of how the internet currently is in Europe. Memes? Nope. Youtubers? Bye!
You’d need a license for everything!!!!
And my fellow Americans my be all like, well, what’s the big deal for us? It’s a Europe deal.
No, because the Youtubers there that you love so much? This effects them too! I’m freaking out because Jack, the person who helps my depression go away, may no longer be able to do what he does!
Guys, we need to stop this somehow. Please.
Call your MEPs. Sign petitions. Protest (Peacefully please. Don’t get hurt).
I’m sorry for tagging you guys if you don’t want to be or already know, I just want as many people to know as possible!
I can’t tag everyone, but if you see this, please reblog it. Spread the news. Sign the petition. Call your MEPs. Do what you can to help stop this from passing in January.
If you’re European, in a couple of weeks you will be denied any and all access to fandom contents on Tumblr and everywhere else on the internet. Here’s why.
On June, 20th the JURI of European Parliament approved of the articles 11 and 13 of the new Copyright Law. These articles are also known as the “Link Tax” and the “Censorship Machines” articles.
Articles 13 in particular forces every internet platform to filter all the contents we upload online, ending once and for all the fandom culture. Which means you won’t be able to upload any type of fandom works like fan arts, fan fictions, gif sets from your favourite films and series, edits, because it’s all copyrighted material. And you won’t also be able to share, enjoy or download other’s contents, because the use of links will be completely restricted.
But not everything’s lost yet. There’s another round of voting scheduled for the early days of July.
What you can do now to save our internet, is to share these informations with all of your family members and friends, and to ask to your MEP (the members of the European Parliament from your country) to vote NO at the next round, to vote against articles 11 and 13.
Here you can find more news and all the details to contact your MEP:
We have just a couple of weeks to stop this complete madness, don’t let them dictating the way we enjoy our internet.
#SaveYourInternet now!
It’s funny how y'all will reblog any and all US things but when whole Europe might lose access to internet then everything is quiet.
Hey, guys! It’s me, your friendly neighborhood law student!
I am seeing this circling my dashboard (yet again) and I would like to say a few things about it. Once again, as I have stated before when I’ve weighed in on something, I am not a lawyer (yet). But, that being said…
Please stop being sensationalist. There are many legitimate criticisms of this directive, but these are not the criticisms I am seeing being spread around. Instead, what’s being spread around amounts to fearmongering. I don’t blame you for doing so - the vast majority of this is being started by the people this will hit hardest, AKA big corporate giants such as Google, Amazon and Microsoft. They have the kind of press pull that very easily leads to this kind of panic.
So, for any of my followers having anxiety about this, let me soothe your worries and address them point by point.
1. “This will destroy the internet in two weeks”
No, no, it won’t. This is a directive, meaning (unlike, say, the the last thing to bring my work onto my tumblr, the fucking GDPR) that it leaves the goals of the directive open to somewhat free implementation by member states, as long as the basic goals of the directive are met on time. As such, it will be years before we actually see any binding legislation as a result of this directive, and how member states choose to implement it will vary on the state in question.
2. “Article 11 will completely restrict the use of links”
Article 11, AKA what is being referred to as the link tax, essentially implements what we call the ancillary copyright of press publishers. This right gives press publishers the right to demand compensation when snippets of their content are displayed on other web pages. So, essentially, this is an article almost directly designed to bop Google (who currently holds the kind of leading market position that the EU sees as incrediblyproblematic because it kind of goes against everything the EU stands for) on the nose. This would force Google (and, with it, other companies) to compensate the writers of articles that are mirrored to their sites in a truncated form, often leading to less traffic to the actual site in question and thus the mirroring site gaining the revenue that would otherwise be due to the writer of the article.
Now - there are legitimate criticisms of this, which mostly hinge on the fact that forcing people to pay the content creator for content they are using may lead some people to stop using that content. Personally, I think it’s better for people to receive compensation for their work, even if it comes at the cost of less sharing of the work. You are allowed to disagree. The most legitimate form of criticism of this article, in my humble opinion, is that it may lead to a picking and choosing of what content to share and what not to. The thing is - is this not something that is being done already? What does this article add to that other than to make sure that if you do choose to share someone else’s work, that other party gets compensated accordingly?
3. “Article 13 will destroy fandom culture”
No, no, it won’t. The vast majority of fandom culture falls under what US law refers to as fair use and most European national laws (which, in the case of EU countries, are harmonized according to the European Union Copyright Directive) refer to as private use. Article 13 in and of itself does not change the allowances made for private use of media in derivative works already. It merely mandates that companies must take effective measures to stop the users of their services from sharing media that infringes on copyright.
Again, I am in the boring camp of agreeing with the EU - I believe it is better for people to be compensated for their work. If the way we are currently using media in fandom is infringing on copyright, then I think we should stop using it that way. You are entirely welcome to disagree with me on this. Notice how the wording of the article constantly emphasizes how measures taken must be appropriate and proportionate. How the the content recognition technology is mentioned as an example of effective measures that could be taken to stop the uploading and sharing of copyrighted works, not as the only way of doing so. Notice how the entire third paragraph of this article deals with best practices and appropriate and proportionate technology which takes into account the availability and effectiveness of technology - so, essentially, if it sucks and flags too many things as infringing on copyright, it should not be used because it is not appropriate, proportionate or effective. And that’s right there in the directive.
And, yet again, there are legitimate criticisms of this article, including the one mentioned in the OP I am replying to regarding the limitations of sharing copyrighted material on, say, Youtube. That’s true - but you haven’t been allowed to upload full films onto Youtube as is, have you? Videos with copyrighted music in the background have been muted or deleted, as well. The most legitimate criticism I’ve seen is that these automatic copyright infringement flagging algorithms are generally overzealous, and this could lead to over-censoring of content that would actually fall under fair use/personal use/whatever you want to call it. That’s true, very true - but the article doesn’t require countries to enforce algorithms being used if they don’t work as they should. See above paragraph.
So, in conclusion: yes, this directive could stand to be worded better. Yes, it may technically lead to the kinds of doomsday scenarios people are imagining - but I really don’t think it will. In fact, I doubt you’ll notice much difference when (in a few years) these laws actually start getting implemented. Notice how no one has heard about the GDPR for like three weeks now, even though we’re living in that supposedly apocalyptic post-GDPR world? (I say, bitterly, as I wade through piles of GDPR every day at work… :D)
Still don’t like the directive proposal? That’s totally fine. By all means, call up your MEP, take a stand! Now, you’re doing it for the right reasons.
Anonymous asked: hey mod! just letting you know about the possible other side of article 13. while the new law certainly doesnt protect fan creation and the like, it was designed to help censor extreme fake news sources. outcry about it was spread by alt right leaning youtubers. im not saying theres no cause for concern, but at least this law isnt being made in the same vein as net neutrality.
I know, and that’s the heart breaking part because I want to help protect creators and their content (and stop rampant fake news sources)- but the thing being proposed is like using a hammer to crack a nut, and there’s too many gaps that could allow it to be misused by large corporations. This is the last thing I’ll post about this because I’m giving myself and all of you a headache with it, but I hope you understand and if I’m wrong I’ll come back and delete all these- I just feel strongly about censorship and I don’t want to risk losing something that’s so important for allowing people to connect with each other and create laughter together.
