EU Copyright Proposal: Not Good, But Not As Blatantly Terrible As It Could Have Been
from the yes,-but...-how-about-doing-it-right? dept
We recently warned that there were efforts underway to make the EU's copyright reform proposal even more draconian and ridiculous. Thankfully, the "compromise," which wasn't a compromise at all and would have made things much worse, was rejected by the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) committee, but there was still plenty of bad stuff to be concerned about.
The mandatory filtering (i.e., mandatory censorship) regime for internet platforms was rejected. That's a good thing. But, on the flip side, the so-called "link tax" requiring payments from those who link to and aggregate news to news publishers has moved forward. Two other small bits of good news were also included: the "freedom of panorama" allowing people to photograph buildings and sculptures without violating someone's copyright and also a "remix right" that will protect the public from doing basic remixing of copyright-covered works. There are still concerns about the "text and data mining" rules which limit what content can be acquired.
So, basically, it's a mixed bag. Some, of course, will argue that any "compromise" will involve some good and some bad, but that assumes that we need a compromise here. Why not aim for creating a policy that's actually better overall, rather than a "compromise" solution? Europe has the chance to lead the way, but appears to have little interest in doing so. Either way, there's still more to go in this process, and other committees to approve things, so the policy still has a long way to go. Hopefully, by the end it pushes more and more to being true copyright reform, rather than just "propping up old industries" reform.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, data mining, eu, eu parliament, filters, google tax, link tax, remix right
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
"Compromise"
How about someone propose we limit copyright and any other such right (with the exception of trademarks) to 20 years. Works marvels for patents! We see lots and lots of new patents, so for patentholders it's working out great. We see lots of great ideas and products become public domain and become much more affordable. THEN we might talk about a compromise of 20 years "free" and an additional 20 years for a hefty fee (so high-value properties only can be protected).
But no. We always start out with the already-bad "status quo" and ONLY make it worse. Every. single. time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"I vote that we chop both your arms off." "What?! No!" "Alright fine, just one."
Yeah, funny how every time copyright is up for a change it always seem to go in one direction, and that's never towards better serving the public, and the best excuse they can come up with is that serving copyright holders is serving the public...
You know, like by ensuring that nothing ever enters the public domain for the public to be able to use, trying to sabotage previously symbiotic relationships by demanding money for the privilege of linking to something and so on.
Graciously offering to allow the public to do certain things that they could have done before were it not for the insane law, like taking a picture of a building, is hardly giving something up on their side, it's simply trading back something that was taken in one category in order to obtain more in another.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Such great potential for schadenfreude...
The mandatory filtering (i.e., mandatory censorship) regime for internet platforms was rejected. That's a good thing. But, on the flip side, the so-called "link tax" requiring payments from those who link to and aggregate news to news publishers has moved forward.
Were it not likely to result in some pretty serious harm before it was rolled back, I could almost hope that the link tax actually did move through, because at this point you have to be intentionally blind not to know what happens at that point.
Google and other sites drop the links rather than pay.
The ones who bought the law, upon seeing traffic to their sites plummet run around like headless chickens, screaming 'Extortion! Blackmail!' and generally throwing tantrums that would shame a 5-year old.
The ones who bought the law come back, begging Google and the other sites to relist them, pretty please?
Law is rolled back, entirely or in a limited fashion such that Google and other large sites now have an even larger market position because they get to not pay the fees, whereas others still do.
There's shooting your own foot because you have no idea what a gun was and what would happen if you pointed it at yourself and pulled the trigger, and then there's watching someone else blow their own foot off, or even several other people, and then deliberately and knowingly doing the same, sure that this time it won't end up horribly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Such great potential for schadenfreude...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Such great potential for schadenfreude...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
On a scale of 0 (best case) to 100 (worst case) ...
It is interesting that while the EU did do a consultation on copyright as a basis, it appears they rejected practically all of the end user suggestions, and implemented only 150 % of the demands put forward by the industry.
Nothing new in Brussels, with 20000 lobbyists for industry and none representing our interests.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
EU Copyright proposal
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Remix?
Since pretty much every website has to get paid for in some manner, posting pretty much anywhere will run you into a commercial angle.
So the theory sounds nice, but reality seems to remix it a little differently.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
typo
> led the way, but appears to have little interest in doing so. Either way, there's still more to go in
< lead the way, but appears to have little interest in doing so. Either way, there's still more to go in
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Such great potential for schadenfreude...
I take my hat off to German MEP Julia Reda AKA @Senficon. She's doing a brilliant job in terms of explaining the issues and working for reform. She's the only Pirate there, although she has been able to build on the goodwill of Amelia Andersdottir and Christian Engstrom to get things done.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "Compromise"
If one part of the agreement copyright is (between the public and the publishers) refuses to do their part then the agreement shouldn't exist. Abolish copyright altogether.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "Compromise"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Was this a typo, or just poorly worded?
That sounds like it will prevent the public from doing remixing with the justification of it being for their own good. Did you mean something like "will protect the public who do basic remixing" instead?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Such great potential for schadenfreude...
A mix of greed and denial I imagine. They really, really want some(all) of that money Google's got, and that overwhelming desire overrides their ability to learn from the past and gets them thinking that this time it will work and the money will be theirs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Remix?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Such great potential for schadenfreude...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]