Despite opposing the legislation, the article is filled with copyright maximalist garbage that goes far beyond the already harsh copyright laws of the EU and US

Despite opposing the legislation, the article is filled with copyright maximalist garbage that goes far beyond the already harsh copyright laws of the EU and US. Just look at this paragraph: "The European Parliament should take a rational approach where they ask themselves, ‘does a certain text and data mining cause any harm to the author or the rights holder?’ And if the answer is no, then they should allow it." Far from "you can't copy copyrighted stuff", now they want "you can't do anything with copyrighted stuff that might reduce the owner's profits". Another paragraph: "The Copyright Reforms, and especially the article on text and data mining, is meant to make sure that companies cannot profit illegally from the intellectual property of others." They don't mean 'cannot profit illegally', they mean 'make it illegal to profit from reading public data'. Such a thin veil of language that, when pulled back, reveals utterly absurd laws - and it's been used before. It's hard to outlaw 'figuring out how stuff works', but they did manage to mostly outlaw 'reverse engineering', despite it being the same thing. Now it's 'data mining' instead of 'using publicly accessible data'. And I'm more than a little disappointed so many journalists can't (or won't) see through it, and instead just parrot what various lobbyists tell them.