3 ms·
The problem is that industry has been involved in EU politics for decades, they have their people and lobbyists well in place and they are able to make the poli
by tehabe 8y ago
The problem is that industry has been involved in EU politics for decades, they have their people and lobbyists well in place and they are able to make the politicians believe that they not only represent the industry but also the consumers/users and the creators. Of course this is not true.
For example Netopia which is sponsored by the film and music industry and the Premier League says consumers are diverse and that is why EU wide licensing is a bad idea.
An organisation of the picture industry claims directly to speak for photographers, even though they are their suppliers
But it works, politicians of all parties argue that those copyright regulations will help creatives and creators, that those people need platforms to present their art is not important, they are supposed to go to the old players (gatekeepers).
P.S. Platform company are also not speaking for creators and creatives. I think HN is full of links to articles about how YouTube isn't listening to the creatives who use their site. And how YouTube is changing the site to make is worse.
- DanBC 8y agoThis law, especially article 11 which people are talking about in this thrread provide protection to the creators. Here they're talking about letting the content creators retain their rights, and that copyright protections cannot be used to prevent publication in other places. > 2. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall leave intact and shall in no way affect any rights provided for in Union law to authors and other rightholders, in respect of the works and other subject -matter incorporated in a press publication. Th e rights referred to in paragraph 1 may not be invoked against those authors and other rightholders and, in particular, may not deprive them of their right to exploit their works and other subject -matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. When a work or other subject -matter is incorporated in a press publication on the basis of a non- exclusive licence, the rights referred to in paragraph 1 may not be invoked to prohibit the use by other authorised users. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 may not be invoked to prohibit the use of works or other subject -matter whose protection has expired.
- tehabe 8y agoArticle 11 is about a new right for publishers. It could potentially make an infringement to post a link to a news article on Twitter, the paragraph you posted is a limitation to that right, because it says that authors can do that what everybody always could have done. This new right was "tested" in Spain and Germany. In Spain news sites lost 15% of their traffic. Bigger site were hit less hard because people knew them and got to them directly. In Germany they gave Google essentially a license for free because Google didn't want to pay and because the publishers couldn't lose the traffic from Google. But smaller companies than Google and start-ups had to pay, putting them at clear disadvantage. Also the scheme costed around 10 million euros in legal fees had almost no income for the publishers. A Massive failure. But they passed it anyway yesterday.