The EU just banned memes

 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,481 posts
 
No it didn't. Don't be dumb.


Fedorekd | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: Fedorekd
PSN:
Steam: Fedorekd
ID: Fedorekd
IP: Logged

8,494 posts
I love you, son.
This is the END of the INTERNET as we know it.


FatherlyNick | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: FatherlyNick
PSN: FatherlyNick
Steam: FatherlyNick
ID: FatherlyNick
IP: Logged

7,831 posts
Hey.
I came here from b.net after a few Floods invited me. None of them post on either b.net nor here anymore, which is sad. I was still active on b.net until for some bizarre reason, b.net admins locked out people who have not played Destiny. Even if you wanted to post on the offtopic section. After that, I fully moved here and have not returned to b.net since.
Please come play Halo with me.
How will they tax links or filter uploads?

Like YT's content ID?


Spartan | Legendary Invincible!
 
more |
XBL: SpartanT110
PSN:
Steam:
ID: SpartanT110
IP: Logged

3,439 posts
 
memes are ILLEGAL


 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,481 posts
 
How will they tax links or filter uploads?

Like YT's content ID?
Who are you referring to with "they"?


 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,481 posts
 
This is the END of the INTERNET as we know it.
One look at our meme thread and man, am I happy the EU has finally banned those things.


Aether | Legendary Invincible!
 
more |
XBL: BirdTHUG
PSN:
Steam: Sofles_Yo
ID: DemonicChronic
IP: Logged

6,395 posts
theaetherone.deviantart.com https://www.instagram.com/aetherone/

Long live NoNolesNeckin.

Ya fuckin' ganderneck.
The new regulations seem pretty awful for fair-use content creation and the sharing of information, regardless of how you want to spin it.


 
challengerX
| custom title
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: challengerX
IP: Logged

41,710 posts
I DONT GIVE A SINGLE -blam!- MOTHER -blam!-ER ITS A MOTHER -blam!-ING FORUM, OH WOW, YOU HAVE THE WORD NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, HOW MOTHER -blam!-ING COOL, NOT, YOUR ARE NOTHING TO ME BUT A BRAINWASHED PIECE OF SHIT BLOGGER, PEOPLE ONLY LIKE YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, SO PLEASE PUNCH YOURAELF IN THE FACE AND STAB YOUR EYE BECAUSE YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A PIECE OF SHIT OF SOCIETY
MAGA


FatherlyNick | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: FatherlyNick
PSN: FatherlyNick
Steam: FatherlyNick
ID: FatherlyNick
IP: Logged

7,831 posts
Hey.
I came here from b.net after a few Floods invited me. None of them post on either b.net nor here anymore, which is sad. I was still active on b.net until for some bizarre reason, b.net admins locked out people who have not played Destiny. Even if you wanted to post on the offtopic section. After that, I fully moved here and have not returned to b.net since.
Please come play Halo with me.
How will they tax links or filter uploads?

Like YT's content ID?
Who are you referring to with "they"?
Those who chose to implement Link Taxes and upload filters.


 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,481 posts
 
The new regulations seem pretty awful for fair-use content creation and the sharing of information, regardless of how you want to spin it.
I don't particularly support the Directive myself but be aware that there's two sides to this story. You're concerned with content creation, which is a legitimate concern, but you should realize that plenty of organizations representing artists, authors, musicians, photographers, videographers and so on have voiced their support for the Directive, arguing it will help content creators receive more and fairer renumeration and address people misusing and plagiarizing their work. I know several small time visual artists who are quite happy with the outcome for just that reason.

We'll have to wait and see what the outcome will be but I don't see it being anywhere near as bad as some would have you believe. The latest version of the law has been thoroughly amended and contains additional safeguards for individual users / SME's as well as serious redress mechanisms, requirements to respect copyright exceptions like fair use and requests not to blanket block or ban content.


 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,481 posts
 
How will they tax links or filter uploads?

Like YT's content ID?
Who are you referring to with "they"?
Those who chose to implement Link Taxes and upload filters.
The term "link tax" is pretty misleading as it's not a government or authority that will tax the use of segments of press publications. It's about large platforms such as Google News aggregating sections of news articles without compensating the publishers / authors. The "link tax" is a legal ground for those rights holders to request licenses or receive fair compensation otherwise from the likes of Google News. Also, individuals will remain free to do so just the same, non-commercial use is exempt and hyperlinks are perfectly fine.

The requirement of including upload filters no longer exists in the final version of the text. A system like Youtube's Content ID could be used but the law does not mandate specific filtering or anything of the kind. This would be up to the countries to further look at and finally the platforms themselves to decide.


Ásgeirr | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: ossku
PSN:
Steam: ossku/Oss
ID: Ossku
IP: Logged

13,207 posts
The angel agreed to trade a set of white wings for the head of another demon. Overjoyed, the demon killed one of his own and plucked the head right off its still-warm body.

The angel then led the demon to heaven, where he underwent centuries of the cruelest tortures imaginable. Finally, the pain was so great that he lost consciousness - at which point his dark wings turned the promised shade of white.
you did this


 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,481 posts
 
you did this
My institution is on a list of prominent signatories and experts that opposed the proposal. I did my best. :(


Aether | Legendary Invincible!
 
more |
XBL: BirdTHUG
PSN:
Steam: Sofles_Yo
ID: DemonicChronic
IP: Logged

6,395 posts
theaetherone.deviantart.com https://www.instagram.com/aetherone/

Long live NoNolesNeckin.

Ya fuckin' ganderneck.
The new regulations seem pretty awful for fair-use content creation and the sharing of information, regardless of how you want to spin it.
I don't particularly support the Directive myself but be aware that there's two sides to this story. You're concerned with content creation, which is a legitimate concern, but you should realize that plenty of organizations representing artists, authors, musicians, photographers, videographers and so on have voiced their support for the Directive, arguing it will help content creators receive more and fairer renumeration and address people misusing and plagiarizing their work. I know several small time visual artists who are quite happy with the outcome for just that reason.

We'll have to wait and see what the outcome will be but I don't see it being anywhere near as bad as some would have you believe. The latest version of the law has been thoroughly amended and contains additional safeguards for individual users / SME's as well as serious redress mechanisms, requirements to respect copyright exceptions like fair use and requests not to blanket block or ban content.
I, personally, just don't see having to pay a fee for hyperlinking to be a good thing in any shape or form. The concept seems absolutely ridiculous. Hyperlinking is one of the most basic features of the internet and is essential for the sharing of information.

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.


 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,481 posts
 
I, personally, just don't see having to pay a fee for hyperlinking to be a good thing in any shape or form. The concept seems absolutely ridiculous. Hyperlinking is one of the most basic features of the internet and is essential for the sharing of information.
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.


Aether | Legendary Invincible!
 
more |
XBL: BirdTHUG
PSN:
Steam: Sofles_Yo
ID: DemonicChronic
IP: Logged

6,395 posts
theaetherone.deviantart.com https://www.instagram.com/aetherone/

Long live NoNolesNeckin.

Ya fuckin' ganderneck.
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.
My understanding of article 11 was that it would be regulating links that display the title of an article and a bit of info underneath. Like those you see on Facebook when linking to any external news site. Which is not something I agree with.

As for article 13? If there are no fines then how are they going to hold platforms accountable for the copyrighted material on them? Why will they spend the money creating the automated systems or employing people to impose the regulations? If the laws are simply that the rights holder has the right to file a claim against something posted on a platform, then how is it really any different than what sites like YouTube already do? Where is the improvement here and how exactly are they going to actually impose the regulations on platforms?


BaconShelf | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: BaconShelf
PSN:
Steam: BaconShelf
ID: BaconShelf
IP: Logged

10,663 posts
 
What even is this thing in terms that aren't politics speak and will it affect me in every day life?


 
 
Flee
| Marty Forum Ninja
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Flee
IP: Logged

15,481 posts
 
I'll get back to you all but wanted to share this first. It's an award-winning paper that analyzed the relationship between Wikipedia and platforms that aggregate its content by sharing links with extensive snippets of text. The paper found that while Wiki adds a lot of value to the other sites, this relationship is unidirectional as few readers follow through to Wiki and give it traffic or revenue. Wikipedia is exempt from the Directive of course, but it stands to reason this holds true for many newspapers, authors and content creaties too. I'm not convinced they chose the right way to go about this but there's definitely evidence that it's a real issue they're trying to address.

https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3174140


Dietrich Six | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: DietrichSix
IP: Logged

11,517 posts
Excuse me, I'm full of dog poison
It's all about that ad revenue fam