Recital 33: " This protection (being that of publishers and authors' content) does not extend to acts of hyperlinking".

Recital 38: "...the responsibility of online content sharing providers pursuant to Article 13 does not extend to acts of
hyperlinking..."

Article 11 paragraph 2a: "The rights referred to in paragraph 1 (which is the rights holder being able to claim compensation for use) shall not extend to mere hyperlinks which are accompanied by individual words" (meaning that hyperlinks are exempt from tax, fee, licensing or any claims of renumeration).

Quote

And I don't think it's a good idea to make platforms liable for their users having posted copyrighted material. My concern is that sites will create vast overreaching AI driven filters to remove or block copyrighted material that will not be able to distinguish between content that has been transformed through fair-use, all just to avoid getting fined.

The Directive makes no mention of any fines. There is no European or national authority that will look for copyrighted material being posted and then fine the platform it's on. The Directive calls for licensing agreements to be concluded between the platforms and the rights holder which will settle the details of any liability issues that might arise. It also instates thorough redress mechanisms in the event that material was unduly removed, states that automatic blocking of content shouldn't happen and requires non-infringing material (such as fair use material) to remain freely available.

Article 13.2a:  "...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."

Article 13.2b: "Any complaint filed under such mechanisms shall be processed without undue delay and be subject to human review."

Article 13.": "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."

I agree that there are genuine concerns but much of this is exaggerated and few who raise your arguments have taken the time to actually read the law or understand what's actually in it. Hopefully this helps you understand it better.

Quote from: Aether on September 12, 2018, 11:34:44 AM

Quote from: Flee on September 10, 2018, 02:00:50 PM

-Being populist and nationalist.

What exactly is so terrible about representing ordinary citizens? Or being proud of your country/nationality?

I'm not a very patriotic person but I don't have anything against anyone who is.

I think it's very disingenuous to pretend that's what populism and nationalism are actually about. Populism is as much about caring about the ordinary citizen as soviet communism was about true equality and abolishment of social classes while those in power were just "more equal" than others and lived in wealth and decadence. On paper and oversimplified it sounds wonderful. Hell yeah, the normal, fair and honest citizens take on the sick and corrupt elite. Who could possibly be opposed to that? But in reality, it's a lot different. And I'll quote something I said in some other thread.

The problem lies more with the tactics being used that are almost inherent to populism. Deliberately targeting the uneducated with waves of propaganda. Riling up latent feelings of discomfort and fear to focus on a convenient and simple scapegoat. Manipulating the complaints of the disenfranchised to serve particular interests. Relying primarily on misinformation and misleading claims to gain support. Oversimplifying complex and multifaceted issues into biased and one-sided snippets of inadequate information. Waging a figurative war on all those who disagree by painting them as elitist bureaucrats looking to keep the pure people down. Deliberately ignoring evidence to the contrary and making bold claims and problems on things known to be nearly impossible. Supporting what at first sight appears to be true according to the gut feeling of the least qualified to judge an issue while dismissing the well researched and substantiated findings of highly qualified experts with years of experience. It's emotion over reason and logic.

Additionally, it is typically opposed to institutions of power, checks and balances, human and civil rights and so forth. Way too often, it is a movement aimed at using misleading claims and misinformation to convince the gullible and uneducated that their complaints will disappear if only the distant and unreachable elite keeping the common man down is taken care off and both expertise and knowledge make way for the impressions of poorly qualified men, only to then replace them with equally distant and elitist leaders of their own that will continue to manipulate them for their own gain and escalate the war on "the other".

I've thought this for years and have only grown more convinced over the years. Populism is one of the, if not the single greatest, threat(s) to western democracy and its core values. It's what brought us Trump and Brexit and hundreds of other smaller pains. This is a perfect example. Anti-vaxx crowds have been gaining popularity in Italy. This has led to thousands of infected children with preventable diseases and several fatalities. A law was proposed to stop this and require more common vaccinations before allowing children to enroll in public schools. Everything looked set until the populist party gained more power in the recent elections. As always, it's anti-science. Anti-intellectualism. Anti-experts. Who cares about facts and actual medicine? Thousands of uninformed people are susceptible to anti-vaxx BS, so why not run with it? Paint the "medical elite" as the bad guys, attack people who get their children vaccinated, describe vaccine policies as "useless and sometimes dangerous", give a platform to anti-vaxx personalities, fan the flames by campaigning against the corrupt elite coaxing you into injecting your children and distributing blatant BS information linking it to autism, depression, cancer... They painted something as commonsense as a vaccine policy for public schools as corrupt elitists trying to line their own pockets and keep the common man down by exposing the children to illness and interfering with the lives of ordinary people. And they succeeded. No extensive vaccine policy anymore. It's a u-turn on vaccine requirements and the first step down a path that medical organizations in Italy fear will lead to the complete removal of a vaccination policy. The country accounts for only around 10% of the EU population yet has almost 30% of its measles infections in the past few years - a number that's been on the rise. That's real populism for you. "Representing the ordinary citizens" my ass. It's a kick in the teeth for anyone who values truth, reason and sensible policy. And the most ironic part is that it happens on the backs of those who ultimately pay the greatest price.

And nationalism is more straightforward. It's got nothing to do with being proud of who you are or where you're from. It's a pretty extreme ideology that generally revolves around the idea that your people are inherently better than the rest and that your national identity should be protected at the cost of others. It goes far beyond reasonable restrictions on immigration and cultural protections and casually flirts with racism and xenophobia every step of the way.

-Being populist and nationalist.

Quote from: Aether on August 28, 2018, 03:08:03 PM

Are they harvesting their organs to?

to where?

These websites aren’t as untocheable as you guys are making them out to be. I wouldn’t be surprised if the large majority of content creators aren’t at least very irritated with YT these days.

leave YouTube to their devices and then maybe everybody will move to twitch and YT can die.

Quote from: Aether on August 06, 2018, 06:37:09 PM

As long as he did nothing illegal then I have more respect for any platform that doesn't ban him or Infowars. I may not care for Alex Jones but I do like when any site upholds the values of freedom of expression even though they aren't legally required to.

The seemingly coordinated banning seems like a bad idea, regardless, as it just gives the guy more reason to claim the establishment is oppressing him and his supporters.

I like to see people on the fringes pulled closer to the center, not forced further into the fringe. If it means having to deal with a partisan conspiratorial cook like Jones then so be it.

He openly bullshits though and calls his network a genuine news outlet, if he labelled himself as a comedy actor it would be fine.