4 ms·

Here's the final document: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52016PC0593&from=EN https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTM

Here's the final document: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52016PC0593&from=EN https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL... Searching for "article 11" (the link one) and "article 13" (the filter one) will help you find the relevant paragraphs. They're both very short and fairly easy to understand.

BlackFly 8y ago
Having read those articles, I struggle to understand how the interpretations of "link tax" and "automated filtering requirement" arose. Article 11 reiterates articles from directive 2001/29/EC which gives copyright holders sole discretion over reproduction in whole or part... but nothing that says a link is a reproduction. What am I missing? Maybe this forbids news aggregators from posting snippets of the articles, but hardly the titles. Article 13 certainly requires content providers to do something. But only provides an example of what that might be: "Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate." It definitely doesn't say automatic, and given YouTube's propensity to generate harmful false positives without recourse, there might be an argument that manual content recognition is more effective. In any case the article just seems to require that content providers do something beyond waiting for takedown notices, which seems reasonable. I am not a lawyer, so obviously I could be missing something subtle, but when I go read articles crying foul, they don't exactly help me understand what I am missing.
yoz-y 8y ago
I am reading and re-reading the article 11, but I just can't get past the legalese to parse it as "aggregators have to pay the publishers for linking their stuff"
tom_mellior 8y ago
That's a document from 2016. It's only "final" in the sense that it's the final version of the Commission's proposal, I think. https://edri.org/copyright-reform-document-pool/ https://edri.org/copyright-reform-document-pool/ has a whole lot of different versions of the text, though I don't know how to find out what text was actually voted on today. I expect it to show up at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=&reference=2016/0280(COD) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?... though apparently that may take a few days. Anyway, the version at http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35373/st09134-en18.pdf http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35373/st09134-en18.pdf for example adds the following paragraph to Article 11: "The rights referred to in the first subparagraph shall not apply in respect of uses of insubstantial parts of a press publication. Member States shall be free to determine the insubstantial nature of parts of press publications taking into account whether these parts are the expression of the intellectual creation of their authors, or whether these parts are individual words or very short excerpts, or both criteria." I don't find this particularly easy to understand, but one reading is "Member States may define article titles to be 'substantial'", in which case any use of them (as in linking) would be prohibited without a license.
- phicoh 8y ago
  Agenda: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNONSGML%2bCOMPARL%2bJURI-OJ-20180620-1%2b01%2bDOC%2bPDF%2bV0%2f%2fEN http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2f... Documents: http://www.emeeting.europarl.europa.eu/committees/agenda/201806/JURI/JURI(2018)0620_1/sitt-8204228 http://www.emeeting.europarl.europa.eu/committees/agenda/201... Relevant amendment: 746 (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2014_2019/plmrep/COMMITTEES/JURI/AM/2018/06-20/1124644EN.pdf http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2014_2019/plmrep/COMM...) "including an unwaivable right to equitable remuneration for this use. That unwaivable right to equitable remuneration can be enforced only by a collective management organisation" (Yes, it took me for ever to find this. I didn't find the results of the voting though)
- teamhappy 8y ago
  You're right, but I was under the impression the it's the latest complete version of the document because all the proposed changes to it were in really short documents. Anyway, the PDF you posted has some of the changes already applied so I recommend everybody to read that document instead. I only read the changes that were proposed to be made to article 13 (on first glance they made it into the version you posted without any further changes) so I can't really comment on article 11. However I will say that I find it completely bizarre that people believe posting a link could ever require a license in Europe (or that any EU member state would define the title of an article to be a snippet of that article).

BlackFly 8y ago

Having read those articles, I struggle to understand how the interpretations of "link tax" and "automated filtering requirement" arose. Article 11 reiterates articles from directive 2001/29/EC which gives copyright holders sole discretion over reproduction in whole or part... but nothing that says a link is a reproduction. What am I missing? Maybe this forbids news aggregators from posting snippets of the articles, but hardly the titles. Article 13 certainly requires content providers to do something. But only provides an example of what that might be: "Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate." It definitely doesn't say automatic, and given YouTube's propensity to generate harmful false positives without recourse, there might be an argument that manual content recognition is more effective. In any case the article just seems to require that content providers do something beyond waiting for takedown notices, which seems reasonable. I am not a lawyer, so obviously I could be missing something subtle, but when I go read articles crying foul, they don't exactly help me understand what I am missing.

yoz-y 8y ago

I am reading and re-reading the article 11, but I just can't get past the legalese to parse it as "aggregators have to pay the publishers for linking their stuff"

tom_mellior 8y ago

That's a document from 2016. It's only "final" in the sense that it's the final version of the Commission's proposal, I think. https://edri.org/copyright-reform-document-pool/ https://edri.org/copyright-reform-document-pool/ has a whole lot of different versions of the text, though I don't know how to find out what text was actually voted on today. I expect it to show up at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=&reference=2016/0280(COD) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?... though apparently that may take a few days. Anyway, the version at http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35373/st09134-en18.pdf http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35373/st09134-en18.pdf for example adds the following paragraph to Article 11: "The rights referred to in the first subparagraph shall not apply in respect of uses of insubstantial parts of a press publication. Member States shall be free to determine the insubstantial nature of parts of press publications taking into account whether these parts are the expression of the intellectual creation of their authors, or whether these parts are individual words or very short excerpts, or both criteria." I don't find this particularly easy to understand, but one reading is "Member States may define article titles to be 'substantial'", in which case any use of them (as in linking) would be prohibited without a license.

phicoh 8y ago
Agenda: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNONSGML%2bCOMPARL%2bJURI-OJ-20180620-1%2b01%2bDOC%2bPDF%2bV0%2f%2fEN http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2f... Documents: http://www.emeeting.europarl.europa.eu/committees/agenda/201806/JURI/JURI(2018)0620_1/sitt-8204228 http://www.emeeting.europarl.europa.eu/committees/agenda/201... Relevant amendment: 746 (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2014_2019/plmrep/COMMITTEES/JURI/AM/2018/06-20/1124644EN.pdf http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2014_2019/plmrep/COMM...) "including an unwaivable right to equitable remuneration for this use. That unwaivable right to equitable remuneration can be enforced only by a collective management organisation" (Yes, it took me for ever to find this. I didn't find the results of the voting though)
teamhappy 8y ago
You're right, but I was under the impression the it's the latest complete version of the document because all the proposed changes to it were in really short documents. Anyway, the PDF you posted has some of the changes already applied so I recommend everybody to read that document instead. I only read the changes that were proposed to be made to article 13 (on first glance they made it into the version you posted without any further changes) so I can't really comment on article 11. However I will say that I find it completely bizarre that people believe posting a link could ever require a license in Europe (or that any EU member state would define the title of an article to be a snippet of that article).