Article 13 (The Meme Ban)

Soldato
Joined
8 Jan 2009
Posts
4,468
If you've been lurking around the internet recently, you may have seen a lot of drama about this "Article 13" in the EU going around. Since most of the other sites are political action groups that want your money, and many others do a garbage job of explaining this, I'll try to explain this as briefly and simply as possible.

What is it?
This whole deal is Article 13 of Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright in the Digital Single Market. Essentially, it proposes to the governments of the EU that they should require sites to host bots that check all work uploaded against a database of copyrighted materials.

This would be a requirement for all sites accessible within these countries, like GDPR. Unlike GDPR, this is not in the best interest of users, but rather large corporations with vast amounts of copyright material.

https://dontwreckthe.net < I prefer this version

https://saveyourinternet.eu

https://www.youtube.com/saveyourinternet/

Kinda surprising no one is talking about this here, but it needs to be made known, Article 13 is bad, different parts of it is written in such a bad way. GDPR has already shown that many websites will just block the EU from visiting them, especially news sites. Each day, I click a link somewhere in Reddit to find that the website is blocked.

Article 13 if it goes ahead in it's full without the changes, will be worst. It could literally split the Internet in half, with EU on one side and everyone else on the other side. YouTube and Reddit are prime targets that could be broken in half and that's if YouTube doesn't block everyone from the EU that their latest messages on Twitter making it suggest they might.



https://twitter.com/YTCreators/status/1061966081005379584

DrzcR9tWkAA5edK.jpg


DrzcR9uWwAAjfrh.jpg


YouTube might block the EU from uploading videos and people outside of YouTube will lose EU viewers and this also affects Twitch. Pretty much everything, Gaming in theory could be affected too.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
90,809
GDPR has quite frankly become the biggest mess I've ever seen - I had to take some casual sites offline just so I didn't accidentally have legal issues :( I can't see this being any different really.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Jan 2012
Posts
3,119
Location
Wiltshire
I really can't see Youtube, Twitch etc are just going to accept the massive losses in revenue that they would experience through this?
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Sep 2005
Posts
16,526
GDPR has quite frankly become the biggest mess I've ever seen - I had to take some casual sites offline just so I didn't accidentally have legal issues :( I can't see this being any different really.

I had a meeting with one of the top commvault directors a few months back. He was explaining about all their upcoming products and upgrades for GDPR. Unfortunately, as he agreed, most are meaingless.
The product will be able to identify data which should not be accessible due to GDPR.....however, the entire system falls over by simply inserting an old tape (preupdate) into a foreign commvault backup system. He said "nobody really understands GDPR do they"
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Sep 2005
Posts
16,526
I understand the desire to protect copyright but going this way about it, potentially dividing the Internet is insane.

a better idea would be to have two internets. One for people who used it in the 90s (ie intelligent people), and the second one for the social media idiots. Stick facebook, snapchat, daily mail onto the second one....and leave the first one alone for everyone to enjoy. The government can meddle all they like with the second one.

Hang on, have I just explained the darkweb?
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Sep 2005
Posts
16,526
It is one of the problems - it was simpler for me just to kill off some old sites though they potentially had some legacy resource value than try and figure out my exposure.

Sometimes it's the easiest way, most of the time the only way, and by far the most cost effective way
 
Associate
Joined
23 Dec 2010
Posts
276
Location
Uk
My brother runs a very successful YouTube channel and he's terrified of Article 13. We're not talking about a kid with a camera either he is paying 6 figure tax sums yearly. The nature of his content, while it doesn't infringe copyright would fall into Article 13 blanket content ban on YouTube (CEO herself gave great examples).

Him and other content creators on his scale who work along side him are putting plans into place to move to America if pushed through and his business is at risk. It's almost like the EU is trying to destroy industries.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Oct 2005
Posts
4,046
Location
UK
No, I think only MEPs, european council and/or commission can.

So it is just an awareness thing.

In America when Net Neutrality was coming people, companies and websites were campaigning for citizens to contact their local government officials to let them know they were against the decision and ask what they were doing for their constituents.

Is not possible to do something similar here?
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Jul 2007
Posts
7,865
Location
Stoke/Norfolk
a better idea would be to have two internets. One for people who used it in the 90s (ie intelligent people), and the second one for the social media idiots. Stick facebook, snapchat, daily mail onto the second one....and leave the first one alone for everyone to enjoy. The government can meddle all they like with the second one.

Hang on, have I just explained the darkweb?

This, a million times this! When the web was a difficult place to access with a physical modem and phone line and a good knowledge of PC's etc, the web seemed a happier place but, as we've dumbed it down so any 1 brain cell moron can grunt out "what's your wifi password mate", the web has become a toxic place.
 
Back
Top Bottom