3 ms·

I hope someone could explain who is supposed to check content, under which conditions and how. If this applies to anybody running a web site or offering hosting

I hope someone could explain who is supposed to check content, under which conditions and how. If this applies to anybody running a web site or offering hosting services I simply fail to see how this can be realistically implemented at all. I don't even understand the primary goal of this proposal for a law, and thus question it's adequateness (which gives rise to appeal before court). Criminal persecution is the police's/attorney's job; offloading these duties to private entities prompts the question why we need those institutions in the first place.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
teamhappy 8y ago
If this draft passes tech companies "storing and giving access to large amounts of works and other subject-matter uploaded by their users" would be liable for copyrighted content that is shared on their platforms. They can (but aren't forced to) avoid that liability by making "best efforts to prevent the availability of specific works or other subject matter by implementing effective and proportionate measures, [...], to prevent the availability on its services of the specific works or other subject matter identified by rightholders and for which the rightholders have provided the service with relevant and necessary information for the application of these measures" and "upon notification by rightholders of works or other subject matter, it has acted expeditiously to remove or disable access to these works". There's also some stuff in there saying these measures should be "effective and proportionate", taking into account how big the company is, how much content is uploaded on their platform and the availability, cost and effectiveness of the measures.
- tannhaeuser 8y ago
  Thanks. They seem to want to go after sharing platforms just shrugging when their community uploads videos, music, and warez, yet receiving all the commercial benefit, and I guess that's fair. But clearly this law needs more exposure, discussion and refinement. It also should be unbundled from the law about link previews for news snippets which is an entirely different legal issue.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

teamhappy 8y ago

If this draft passes tech companies "storing and giving access to large amounts of works and other subject-matter uploaded by their users" would be liable for copyrighted content that is shared on their platforms. They can (but aren't forced to) avoid that liability by making "best efforts to prevent the availability of specific works or other subject matter by implementing effective and proportionate measures, [...], to prevent the availability on its services of the specific works or other subject matter identified by rightholders and for which the rightholders have provided the service with relevant and necessary information for the application of these measures" and "upon notification by rightholders of works or other subject matter, it has acted expeditiously to remove or disable access to these works". There's also some stuff in there saying these measures should be "effective and proportionate", taking into account how big the company is, how much content is uploaded on their platform and the availability, cost and effectiveness of the measures.

tannhaeuser 8y ago
Thanks. They seem to want to go after sharing platforms just shrugging when their community uploads videos, music, and warez, yet receiving all the commercial benefit, and I guess that's fair. But clearly this law needs more exposure, discussion and refinement. It also should be unbundled from the law about link previews for news snippets which is an entirely different legal issue.