Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

Here is Anglo-merican reportage.
AP | German Wikipedia Blacked Out in Protest of EU Copyright Plan
Visitors to the online encyclopedia's German section [!] were greeted Thursday with a statement from Wikipedia authors urging them to contact EU lawmakers to try to stop the bill.

The most controversial section [!] would require companies such as YouTube and Facebook to take responsibility for copyrighted material that's uploaded to their platforms.

Which bill?
"The European Parliament is due to vote on the bill March 26."
Which "section"?
Wikipedia authority or unnamed EU bill?
Which authors?
not named
Which EU lawmakers?
not named
Which Wikipedia "section" is a division of YouTube (Google, Alphabet) or Facebook?

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Thu Mar 21st, 2019 at 06:20:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
it's just libertarians being libertarian.

Gummint's cummina gicha. Be afraid, hate your leaders, they're gona spoil your fun and take your toys away. Vote Orban/Le Pen/whever the biggest fascist in Poland/Netherlands is

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Sun Mar 24th, 2019 at 07:41:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Far as I can tell, if the proposals pass all sites that allows users to write, embed images and movies will have to either implement upload filters (and look at Tumblr if anyone think that is easy), buy licenses for all works that may be posted there, or be liable for users misconduct. And contrary to earlier legislation, if you don't do one of the first, removing after the fact is not enough. And with IPRED 2 came mandatory punitive damages for copyright infringements, so it will be most lucrative to sue sites like Wikipedia, or for that matter Eurotrib.

Wikipedia in Sweden was sued a couple of years ago for allowing photos of public statues without licenses. Photos the users had taken themselves. That suit was successful, so I don't think German Wikipedia is wrong here. This is legislation that may very well break Wikipedia and sites like Eurotrib.

Oh, and snippet and link will count as copyright infringement.

by fjallstrom on Sun Mar 24th, 2019 at 10:53:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
For content links and quick analysis, Julia Reda MEP (Pirate): https:/juliareda.eu/2019/02/eu-copyright-final-text

For time schedule, MEP contact information, etc: https:/saveyourinternet.eu/act

Wikipedia is not a subdivision of any of the mentioned companies but as usual in the EU copyright legislation is publicly motivated by the need to get money from big US companies and written so it hits everybody. This is not an accident.

And if anyone thinks it is about starving artists and writers:

Authors' rights: The Parliament's proposal that authors should have a right to proportionate remuneration has been severely watered down: Total buy-out contracts will continue to be the norm.
by fjallstrom on Sun Mar 24th, 2019 at 11:04:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
https: is supposed to be followed by two slashes. Apparently, the second got converted to an italic tag.
by fjallstrom on Sun Mar 24th, 2019 at 11:06:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Hitting Google by forcing everyone to buy Google's upload filter is a Galaxy Brain level of good faith.
by generic on Mon Mar 25th, 2019 at 08:40:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And we have a list of shame.
by generic on Tue Mar 26th, 2019 at 08:25:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Article 13 will wreck the internet because Swedish MEPs accidentally pushed the wrong voting button / Boing Boing
In the EU, if a Member of the Parliament presses the wrong button on a vote, they can have the record amended to show what their true intention was, but the vote is binding.

Today, the European Parliament voted to pass the whole Copyright Directive without a debate on Articles 11 and 13 by a margin of five votes.

But actually, a group of Swedish MEPs have revealed that they pressed the wrong button, and have asked to have the record corrected. They have issued a statement saying they'd intended to open a debate on amendments to the Directive so they could help vote down Articles 11 and 13.

Is there actually a mechanism in the European Parliament that allows you to pretend to have voted another way??

by generic on Wed Mar 27th, 2019 at 10:08:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
IN US CONGRESS, that procedure ahh indicating "plausible deniability" is what you'd call the "voice" vote or "present" vote option.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Wed Mar 27th, 2019 at 04:00:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Voting one way on amendments but another way on the final bill is one method of having it both ways, at least to individual constituents in private.
Do they have a provision for a "motion to reconsider" in the EU, which could be a way of forcing a revote.
by Andhakari on Wed Mar 27th, 2019 at 05:44:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series