ysth 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (182)

• On the post: EU Moves Forward With Agreement To Fundamentally Change The Internet From Open To Closed

  

  ysth ( profile ), 14 Feb, 2019 @ 10:38am

  Re: Re: EU Move To Fundamentally Change The Internet from Open t

  Yes, and not even licensed.

• On the post: EU Moves Forward With Agreement To Fundamentally Change The Internet From Open To Closed

  

  ysth ( profile ), 14 Feb, 2019 @ 07:15am

  EU Move To Fundamentally Change The Internet from Open to Closed

  Despite the fact that even the staunchest supporters of Article 13 were asking for it to be dropped from the final version of the EU Copyright Directive, that didn't happen. In the final trilogue negotiations between the EU Council, the EU Commission and the EU Parliament, it appears that the agreed upon "compromise" is basically as bad as we feared. It will fundamentally change the entire nature of the internet. And not in a good way. As we recently discussed, the only way this makes sense is if the goal is to have the law be so bad that big internet companies feel forced to pay their way out of it.

  And it appears that's what we've got. MEP Julia Reda's summary of the final deal highlights many of the problems with both Articles 11 and 13. Here's the mess with Article 13:

  Commercial sites and apps where users can post material must make “best efforts” to preemptively buy licences for anything that users may possibly upload – that is: all copyrighted content in the world. An impossible feat. In addition, all but very few sites (those both tiny and very new) will need to do everything in their power to prevent anything from ever going online that may be an unauthorised copy of a work that a rightsholder has pointed out to the platform. They will have no choice but to deploy upload filters, which are by their nature both expensive and error-prone. Should a court ever find their licensing or filtering efforts not fierce enough, sites are directly liable for infringements as if they had committed them themselves. This massive threat will lead platforms to over-comply with these rules to stay on the safe side, further worsening the impact on our freedom of speech.

  And with Article 11:

  The final version of this extra copyright for news sites closely resembles the version that already failed in Germany – only this time not limited to search engines and news aggregators, meaning it will do damage to a lot more websites. Reproducing more than “single words or very short extracts” of news stories will require a licence. That will likely cover many of the snippets commonly shown alongside links today in order to give you an idea of what they lead to. We will have to wait and see how courts interpret what “very short” means in practice – until then, hyperlinking (with snippets) will be mired in legal uncertainty. No exceptions are made even for services run by individuals, small companies or non-profits, which probably includes any monetised blogs or websites.

  If this becomes law, I'm not sure Techdirt can continue publishing in the EU. At the very least, it will require us to spend a large sum of money on lawyers to determine what our liability risk is -- to the point that it might just not be worth it at all. Article 13 makes a commenting system untenable, as we simply cannot setup a filter that will block people from uploading copyright-covered content. Article 11 potentially makes our posts untenable, since we frequently quote other news sites in order to comment on them (as we do above).

  This is, of course, the desire of those supporting both bills. It is not just to close the (made up, mythical) "value gap." It is to fundamentally change the internet away from an open system of communications -- one that anyone can use to bypass traditional gatekeepers, to a closed "broadcast" system, in which key legacy gatekeepers control access to the public, via a complicated set of licenses that strip all of the benefits and profits from the system.

  Not only will this do great harm to the general public's ability to communicate freely over the internet, it will do massive harm to artists and creators -- especially more independent ones, who will be effectively blocked from using these platforms to connect directly with their fans. Rather they will be required to go through "licensed" intermediaries, who will demand a huge cut of any money. In other words, it's a return to the pre-internet days, where if you wanted to become a professional creator, your only options were to sign away all your rights to giant conglomerate record labels/studios/publishers.

  It is incredible -- and incredibly disappointing -- that the EU is moving towards bringing back such a world, but that is what the latest agreement means.

  There is still a chance to stop this from becoming law, though it will take a lot of effort. As Reda explains:

  We can still stop this law The Parliament and Council negotiators who agreed on the final text now return to their institutions seeking approval of the result. If it passes both votes unchanged, it becomes EU law, which member states are forced to implement into national law. In both bodies, there is resistance. The Parliament’s process starts with the approval by the Legal Affairs Committee – which is likely to be given on Monday, February 18. Next, at a date to be announced, the EU member state governments will vote in the Council. The law can be stopped here either by 13 member state governments or by any number of governments who together represent 35% of the EU population (calculator). Last time, 8 countries representing 27% of the population were opposed. Either a large country like Germany or several small ones would need to change their minds: This is the less likely way to stop it. Our best bet: The final vote in the plenary of the European Parliament, when all 751 MEPs, directly elected to represent the people, have a vote. This will take place either between March 25 and 28, on April 4 or between April 15 and 18. We’ve already demonstrated last July that a majority against a bad copyright proposal is achievable. The plenary can vote to kill the bill – or to make changes, like removing Articles 11 and 13. In the latter case, it’s up to the Council to decide whether to accept these changes (the Directive then becomes law without these articles) or to shelve the project until after the EU elections in May, which will reshuffle all the cards.

  If you're an EU citizen, this next bit is important. Now is the time to start speaking up:

  This is where you come in The final Parliament vote will happen mere weeks before the EU elections. Most MEPs – and certainly all parties – are going to be seeking reelection. Articles 11 and 13 will be defeated if enough voters make these issues relevant to the campaigns. (Here’s how to vote in the EU elections – change the language to one of your country’s official ones for specific information) It is up to you to make clear to your representatives: Their vote on whether to break the internet with Articles 11 and 13 will make or break your vote in the EU elections. Be insistent – but please always stay polite. Look up your representatives’ voting behavior at SaveYourInternet.eu Call or visit your MEPs’ offices (in Brussels, Strasbourg or their local constituency) Visit campaign and party events and bring up the topic Sign the record-breaking petition and spread the word, if you haven’t yet Together, we can still stop this law.

• On the post: The 3rd Party Doctrine: Or Why Lawyers May Not Ethically Be Able To Use Whatsapp

  

  ysth ( profile ), 06 Feb, 2019 @ 05:56pm

  smartphone Contacts baffle me

  Smartphone Contacts baffle me.

  I have an android phone. I use it to make phone calls. In my list of contacts are people I call.

  I use it to send texts. In my list of contacts are people I text.

  I use the gmail app to read my gmail mail. In my list of contacts are people I have emailed.

  Why are these all in the same list? The apps serve different purposes; I can't see ever wanting to scroll through my contacts, then decide what method I want to use to contact them.

  I just don't get why any of this is phone data, not app specific data. Or rather, I get it, but I don't see how that serves me, rather than the companies who want my info.

• On the post: Another Pre-Super Bowl 'Sex Trafficking Sting' Busts A Bunch Of People Trying To Buy Sex From Cops Pretending To Be Teens

  

  ysth ( profile ), 04 Feb, 2019 @ 08:14pm

  so confused, someone help?

  I don't pay any attention to the Super Bowl, if I can help it. Perhaps because of that, I had never heard of this annual sex trafficking scare.

  Can someone explain the connection between it and the Super Bowl? It has me feeling completely at sea.

• On the post: FCC Accused Of Colluding With Big Carriers On 5G Policy

  

  ysth ( profile ), 04 Feb, 2019 @ 07:16am

  Article miscategorized

  Doesn't fcc belong under companies, not tags?

• On the post: Gov't Used An Ambiguously-Worded Tweet As The Basis For The Raid Of NSA Contractor's House

  

  ysth ( profile ), 02 Jan, 2019 @ 01:33pm

  Smells of parallel construction

• On the post: New Year's Message: Do Something Different

  

  ysth ( profile ), 31 Dec, 2018 @ 07:47pm

  Believe something, say something.
  
  And most importantly, do something.

• On the post: We Interrupt All The Hating On Technology To Remind Everyone We Just Landed On Mars

  

  ysth ( profile ), 27 Nov, 2018 @ 01:14pm

  https://youtu.be/p3SHUfdyEZI

• On the post: Corel Manages To Accuse A Totally Legit Customer Of Piracy

  

  ysth ( profile ), 21 Nov, 2018 @ 02:43pm

  discount

  "I want to ask them if that 5% is good for Photoshop"

  It's definitely good for GIMP.

• On the post: Music Industry's Nonsense 'Myth Busting' About EU's Censorship Machines Is Basically Saying 'Nuh-uh' Repeatedly

  

  ysth ( profile ), 02 Jul, 2018 @ 01:10pm

  not paying attention or incredibly dishonest

  Why choose when you can have both?

• On the post: Verizon's Sad Attempt To Woo Millennials Falls Flat On Its Face

  

  ysth ( profile ), 02 Jul, 2018 @ 12:49pm

  This article confused me

  I kept looking for new news; thought the article was just going through background first, but then it ended.
  
  Was there something new here or was this just a summary of the state of Verizon innovation?
  
  Maybe I was confused by the "Sad Attempt" in the title, that lead me to infer some particular attempt would be talked about?

• On the post: Judge Cock(y)blocks Author Faleena Hopkins' Demand Other Authors Stop Using The Word 'Cocky' In Their Titles

  

  ysth ( profile ), 19 Jun, 2018 @ 10:33pm

  Heh

  THE COURT: There may be a different standard in the patent law office than there is in court.

• On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: May 20th – 26th

  

  ysth ( profile ), 27 May, 2018 @ 04:54pm

  Re:

  Studios?

• On the post: Michigan Takes On The NSA With New Law, But Probably Won't Have Much Of An Impact

  

  ysth ( profile ), 24 May, 2018 @ 01:47am

  the law has limited utility

  I see what you did there :)

• On the post: Why Is Hollywood Pushing A Totally Bogus Push Poll Trying To Undermine The Internet?

  

  ysth ( profile ), 07 Mar, 2018 @ 08:14am

  Expected the subject to be "Rhetorical Questions" :)

• On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 155: Lies, Damned Lies & Audience Metrics

  

  ysth ( profile ), 21 Feb, 2018 @ 12:27pm

  "Fix that"? How am I broken if I use this website to listen to this website's podcasts? Convince me there's some functionality to be gained by joining some podcast subscription service?

• On the post: Mike Godwin Remembers John Perry Barlow

  

  ysth ( profile ), 08 Feb, 2018 @ 11:24pm

  "Twenty-three years ago I fed these identical ducks with these identical sandwiches... and ten and twenty years hence the same ducks and the same undergraduates will share the same ritual feast, and the ducks will bite the undergraduates' fingers as they have just bitten mine. How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks."

• On the post: Salt Lake Comic Con Files For A New Trial And Seeks Round 2

  

  ysth ( profile ), 29 Jan, 2018 @ 11:07pm

  Well played, sir.

• On the post: Wherein We Ask The California Supreme Court To Lessen The Damage The Court Of Appeal Caused To Speech

  

  ysth ( profile ), 24 Jan, 2018 @ 07:38pm

  what we?

  The text of the article should mention the Copia Institute at least once.

• On the post: Chinese Billionaire Got A US Court To Issue An Unconstitutional Gag Order On A Critic

  

  ysth ( profile ), 02 Jan, 2018 @ 11:07am

  Re:

  From the quote in this article, the CA TRO just targeted activities, perhaps not including speech.

Next >>