Yo OP you’re a real piece of artwork, ya know that?
So, first of all, this is pure hyperbole, but i’ll get to that in the end. What I find especially bad is that you only link to the change.org petition that is really vaguely worded.
So, to amend that, let’s provide links!
Article 11 over here:
https://indivigital.com/resources/copyright/article-11/
Article 13 over here: https://indivigital.com/resources/copyright/article-13/
These above links have on the left side the original text and on the right the most updated version as of september 12.
All good? Nice, let’s take a look inside them!
TL;DR: The Directive’s new amendments on Articles 11 and 13 have actually enstrenghtened consumer rights and defused to a large degree the ticking time bomb that was the bots. Also, the EU has no Senate!
So, first off, Article 11 - the apocalyptic attitude of the OP is already disputed because we see right in Section 1a that, and to quote:
“
The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall not prevent legitimate private and non-commercial use of press publications by individual users.
“
Which means, if you’re not making money off it, then it’s all good - you can share it online, or keep it for yourself on your phone or computer.
This is further corroborated by Sections 2a, 4 and 4a, which in turn talk about sharing hyperlinks (aka links from websites), how long the rights are retained for commercial use (which number has been reduced from 20 years to just 5 years - a bit much, but not apocalyptic again), and about the Members of the EU having to accomodate for these compensations.
To quote again:
“
2a. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall not extend to mere hyperlinks which are accompanied by individual words.
“
4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 5 years after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication. The right referred to in paragraph 1 shall not apply with retroactive effect.
“
4a. Member States shall ensure that authors receive an appropriate share of the additional revenues press publishers receive for the use of a press publication by information society service providers. “
This is a good time to remind that Articles 11 and 13 and the entire legislations ARE NOT LAWS. They are DIRECTIVES, which is basically EU law from what i know for making a list of rules that member countries can check, see if they comply, and then choose for themselves if they find their current laws adequate or need to update them to fit the definitions set by the directive. For more on that, check an actual law student’s post on the subject here - she honestly tells it much better than i could ever hope to do so:
http://stolligaseptember.tumblr.com/post/174628019342/shenannygans-replied-to-your-post-okay-just
Right, now onto Article 13. So, the big important boi here is Section 2b, which, to quote a brief excerpt:
“
Members States shall ensure that online content sharing service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place effective and expeditious complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case the cooperation referred to in paragraph 2a leads to unjustified removals of their content. Any complaint filed under such mechanisms shall be processed without undue delay and be subject to human review. Right holders shall reasonably justify their decisions to avoid arbitrary dismissal of complaints.
“
THIS RIGHT HERE PROTECTS YOUR RIGHTS FROM CORPORATIONS FROM CLAIMING IT AS THEIR OWN.
It also serves another purpose as it demands that all content that has been claimed MUST be reviewed by a HUMAN PERSON, not a bot. This is monumental news, for the mere fact that what we feared with Article 13 was that the directives was gonna utilize bots like YouTube and Google do exclusively, and mandate they be used. This section basically says “yo, whatever you use, if something is claimed, you gotta have a human review”.
These views are further strengthened by the rest of Section 2, 2a and 3, which goes in length about how current streaming and video/content-hosting services’ code of conducts will be enforced. This is where the argument about how the EU will go full dictatorship and will censor the internet falls apart. To quote briefly again:
“ 2. Licensing agreements which are concluded by online content sharing service providers with right holders for the acts of communication referred to in paragraph 1, shall cover the liability for works uploaded by the users of such online content sharing services in line with the terms and conditions set out in the licensing agreement, provided that such users do not act for commercial purposes.
“ 2a. Member States shall provide that where right holders do not wish to conclude licensing agreements, online content sharing service providers and right holders shall cooperate in good faith in order to ensure that unauthorised protected works or other subject matter are not available on their services. Cooperation between online content service providers and right holders 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.
“ 3. […] When defining best practices, 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.
“
So, in conclusion, Article 13 and Article 11 is not the devil it once was, and its recent amendment has made it a lot more user-friendly!
Now, I wanna address the original post directly, cuz the language used is very telling. First of all, it’s all caps, so, unless you’re @factsinallcaps, your credibility is automatically lowered imo. Secondly, the lack of direct links to either articles, or even news pieces from websites about net neutrality is very telling. The fact that only the link to the change.org petition is linked is highly suspicious.
Now, let’s go into details; First of all, the EU has no Senate. This isn’t the United States. And there was never any talk about shutting down social media - this is not a situation like in Turkey, where YouTube has been taken down and replaced with a local one.
The wording especially of the final phrase, “
INSTEAD OF TAKING THESE PRECIOUS THINGS THEY SHOULD WORRY ABOUT OTHER.STUFF ( Migrants, new school system) BUT NAH THEY WANT TO TAKE AWAY OUR SOCIAL MEDIAS
“, also has me severely troubled. The EU cannot implement a pan-european EU-licensed new school system. That’s just not how it functions! This is up to each individual country comprising the EU to make up.
Also the migrants crisis and the way they’re thrown nonchalant here reads like a very reactionary right-wing talking point. And this is a big deal when it comes to the Article 13 debacle - the talking points have been hijacked by anti-eu personas (like Computing Forever) who espouse views that are anti-semitic, islamophobic, sexist, transmisogynist and racist. So, despite Article 13 being a really obvious sticking point and in need of proper debate, especially after the tragedy that was the rollback of net neutrality in the United States, we had the discourse surrounding the Article and what it does poisoned by Far-Right discourse, which in turn has produced the meme about the EU coming to censor all memes and, in this post’s case, take down all social media.
And it’s sad.
And I’m tired of it.
Now, what is happening with Article 13 right now? Because, remember, these amendments happened in early September, and it is November the 8th right now, 40 minutes past midnight in Greece. So, according to Julia Reid, the head of the EU pirate party and overal extreme badass is in negotiations with the rest of the EU council, discussing further amendments, and judging from her twitter, things are going pretty good!
https://twitter.com/Senficon/status/1055539157852975104
(quoting the tweet in case you can’t open the link:
Good news, Council did not insist on its wording on the relationship with existing #copyright exceptions in Article 17a today. It looks like we may be able to solve this problem in the next round of negotiations. #FixCopyright )
(I’ve never looked into Article 17, so I can’t speak about that, but I trust her)
And that’s about it! Votes are set to come in like early 2019, which will finalize the Articles, and then the directive will be shipped to each member state, where each parliament will decide on how to implement those articles
Don’t fall for the reactionaries tumblr, and research before you reblog! The current version has 20k notes and it tells a grossly misleading version of the Directive, one influenced by anti-EU, far-right reactionary elements.
And sorry for the long post! Have a good evening ^_^
