6 ms·

> Smaller companies won’t be able sustain an upload functionality. Thanks for killing innovation and supporting large monopolies The law explicitly states that

> Smaller companies won’t be able sustain an upload functionality. Thanks for killing innovation and supporting large monopolies The law explicitly states that the size of the company, the amount of data that is uploaded and the availability, cost and effectiveness of the measures should be taken into account. I don't understand how you call call this completely absurd considering that sites like Twitch and YouTube are already doing it. > Link Tax: publishers want to be compensated if you link to their content. The "link tax" has nothing whatsoever to do with linking. If you run a commercial site that publishes snippets of press publications you now have to obtain a license to do so. That's all there is to it.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> If you run a commercial site that publishes snippets of press publications you now have to obtain a license to do so Suppose someone posts a Der Spiegel article. I read it and quote a sentence in a comment. Y Combinator must now (a) reach out to Der Spiegel, (b) negotiate a fee agreement with them, (c) monitor my quoting of Der Spiegel content, (d) remit international payments to Der Spiegel and still (e) subject itself to other risks and requirements the fee agreement and EU compliance costs entail? (I'm ignoring questions around whether including the article's title itself requires fee remittance.) That's what is being proposed and that is dumb.
- phicoh 8y ago
  If I got it correct, that is not what is proposed. What is proposed is that you pay an amount of money to a collection agency and then get the right to publish those snippets. I think it is a bad proposal that will do more harm than good. But it is something that can be made to work.
  - anoncow 8y ago
    Has the EU reduced itself to this? They want to be the internet's middlemen? Shame. Had high hopes from the EU, but it seems like someone is pushing an agenda.
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > What is proposed is that you pay an amount of money to a collection agency and then get the right to publish those snippets Pardon me, so I post a comment on Hacker News and now Y Combinator has to (a) identify Der Spiegel's collection agency, (b) reach out to said agency, (b) negotiate a fee agreement with them, (c) monitor my quoting of Der Spiegel content, (d) remit international payments to Der Spiegel's collection agency and still (e) subject itself to other risks and requirements the fee agreement and EU compliance costs entail. This system having the benefit that when I quote Le Temps, presuming they work with the same collection agency, we cut out step (b). Otherwise all of that again.
    - DanBC 8y ago
      Can you point to the article of the proposed regulation that you're talking about please?
      - phicoh 8y ago
        The relevant part should be 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...
    - phicoh 8y ago
      That's not how it works for existing cases. There is in each country a single agency per section of the law. For example, if you want play music in a restaurant, you know who to contact. In return you get the right to use all music ever created. No need to figure out who owns what.
      - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
        Do you think it's reasonable for Y Combinator to be assessed, by twenty-eight national agencies, fees and fines if I--a non-revenue generating user--quote a European publication in a comment?
    - DanBC 8y ago
- teamhappy 8y ago
  > That's what is being proposed No it isn't. Just read the damn thing. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35373/st09134-en18.pdf http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35373/st09134-en18.pdf
  - DanBC 8y ago
    How the fuck is providing someone a link to the actual law being downvoted? Here's the specific article: Article 11 Protection of press publications concerning online uses 1. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications established in a Member State with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the online use of their press publications by information society service providers. 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. 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. The 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. 3. Articles 5 to 8 of Directive 2001/29/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU shall apply mutatis mutandis in respect of the rights referred to in paragraph 1. 4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 1 year after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication. 5. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to press publications first published before [entry into force of the Directive].
    - 8y ago
baxtr 8y ago
a) if they’re already „doing it“, tell me: why do we need a law exactly then? b) do you know how a link works? Any link is usually a preview of content because it has e.g. a title. Where do you draw the line? And what is a commercial site exactly? Google news is free for example. We have tried this in Germany and in Spain. It didn’t work. Why do it on EU level again just to put every site owner at legal risk?
- teamhappy 8y ago
  The proposal says "The rights referred to in the first subparagraph shall not apply in respect of uses of insubstantial parts of a press publication". The title is the least substantial part I can think of.
  - baxtr 8y ago
    This is your personal interpretation and you might be right. But in reality, if it's not defined concretely enough (like in this case), courts will decide. Until then, everybody should rather refrain from linking, quoting and commenting.
skywhopper 8y ago
This is the second comment formatted in a very similar way, responding to the same points in the same way. Having learned about troll farms, I have to wonder how many HN accounts are run by people sitting in cubes, posting talking points and paid by the corporate lobbyists who are pushing these laws through the EU parliament. teamhappy, your arguments make no sense. Obtaining a license to quote a news article? YouTube's content filtering held up as an example of a system that works well? These are ridiculous statements. I hope you are getting paid well and don't really believe this stuff.
- dang 8y ago
  You've broken the site guidelines here, which specifically ask people not to insinuate astroturfing or shillage without evidence. Please (re-)read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and don't do that. If you or anyone wants explanation of why we have this rule, I've posted a ton about it: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturfing https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...

JumpCrisscross 8y ago

> If you run a commercial site that publishes snippets of press publications you now have to obtain a license to do so Suppose someone posts a Der Spiegel article. I read it and quote a sentence in a comment. Y Combinator must now (a) reach out to Der Spiegel, (b) negotiate a fee agreement with them, (c) monitor my quoting of Der Spiegel content, (d) remit international payments to Der Spiegel and still (e) subject itself to other risks and requirements the fee agreement and EU compliance costs entail? (I'm ignoring questions around whether including the article's title itself requires fee remittance.) That's what is being proposed and that is dumb.

phicoh 8y ago
If I got it correct, that is not what is proposed. What is proposed is that you pay an amount of money to a collection agency and then get the right to publish those snippets. I think it is a bad proposal that will do more harm than good. But it is something that can be made to work.
- anoncow 8y ago
  Has the EU reduced itself to this? They want to be the internet's middlemen? Shame. Had high hopes from the EU, but it seems like someone is pushing an agenda.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > What is proposed is that you pay an amount of money to a collection agency and then get the right to publish those snippets Pardon me, so I post a comment on Hacker News and now Y Combinator has to (a) identify Der Spiegel's collection agency, (b) reach out to said agency, (b) negotiate a fee agreement with them, (c) monitor my quoting of Der Spiegel content, (d) remit international payments to Der Spiegel's collection agency and still (e) subject itself to other risks and requirements the fee agreement and EU compliance costs entail. This system having the benefit that when I quote Le Temps, presuming they work with the same collection agency, we cut out step (b). Otherwise all of that again.
  - DanBC 8y ago
    Can you point to the article of the proposed regulation that you're talking about please?
    - phicoh 8y ago
      The relevant part should be 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...
  - phicoh 8y ago
    That's not how it works for existing cases. There is in each country a single agency per section of the law. For example, if you want play music in a restaurant, you know who to contact. In return you get the right to use all music ever created. No need to figure out who owns what.
    - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
      Do you think it's reasonable for Y Combinator to be assessed, by twenty-eight national agencies, fees and fines if I--a non-revenue generating user--quote a European publication in a comment?
  - DanBC 8y ago
teamhappy 8y ago
> That's what is being proposed No it isn't. Just read the damn thing. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35373/st09134-en18.pdf http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35373/st09134-en18.pdf
- DanBC 8y ago
  How the fuck is providing someone a link to the actual law being downvoted? Here's the specific article: Article 11 Protection of press publications concerning online uses 1. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications established in a Member State with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the online use of their press publications by information society service providers. 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. 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. The 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. 3. Articles 5 to 8 of Directive 2001/29/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU shall apply mutatis mutandis in respect of the rights referred to in paragraph 1. 4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 1 year after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication. 5. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to press publications first published before [entry into force of the Directive].
  - 8y ago

baxtr 8y ago

a) if they’re already „doing it“, tell me: why do we need a law exactly then? b) do you know how a link works? Any link is usually a preview of content because it has e.g. a title. Where do you draw the line? And what is a commercial site exactly? Google news is free for example. We have tried this in Germany and in Spain. It didn’t work. Why do it on EU level again just to put every site owner at legal risk?

teamhappy 8y ago
The proposal says "The rights referred to in the first subparagraph shall not apply in respect of uses of insubstantial parts of a press publication". The title is the least substantial part I can think of.
- baxtr 8y ago
  This is your personal interpretation and you might be right. But in reality, if it's not defined concretely enough (like in this case), courts will decide. Until then, everybody should rather refrain from linking, quoting and commenting.

skywhopper 8y ago

This is the second comment formatted in a very similar way, responding to the same points in the same way. Having learned about troll farms, I have to wonder how many HN accounts are run by people sitting in cubes, posting talking points and paid by the corporate lobbyists who are pushing these laws through the EU parliament. teamhappy, your arguments make no sense. Obtaining a license to quote a news article? YouTube's content filtering held up as an example of a system that works well? These are ridiculous statements. I hope you are getting paid well and don't really believe this stuff.

dang 8y ago
You've broken the site guidelines here, which specifically ask people not to insinuate astroturfing or shillage without evidence. Please (re-)read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and don't do that. If you or anyone wants explanation of why we have this rule, I've posted a ton about it: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturfing https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...