4 ms·
The crucial issue that I miss both in this directive and the current practice is that companies are encouraged to use automatic filters while actual copyright h
by jonathanstrange 8y ago
The crucial issue that I miss both in this directive and the current practice is that companies are encouraged to use automatic filters while actual copyright holder have almost no way of appealing against false copyright claims.
I'd be fine with automatic content tagging if at the same time false copyright claims by someone who does not actually hold the copyright would lead to a hefty fine and/or be considered a crime.
Right now, large corporations seem to spam the systems with automated take-down messages without any control and any incentive not to do so, to the effect that actual content producers have almost no way to defend themselves against false claims. Every youtube channel owner can sing you a song about that.
That's a problem for both the US and EU copyright system, but it's also not clear to me if and how the forthcoming EU directive would fix that problem. For all it's worth, it seems to make things worse.
- arnvald 8y agoThis is a good point. False copyright claims should be penalized, enforcing companies to improve the accuracy of their claims.
- dexen 8y agoThe american DMCA includes provision to penalize false takedowns, but from what I've seen the provision isn't used too often.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- AnssiH 8y ago> For all it's worth, it seems to make things worse. Actually, adopted amendment 160 reads: > Members States shall ensure that online content sharing service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place effective and expeditious complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case the cooperation referred to in paragraph 2a leads to unjustified removals of their content. Any complaint filed under such mechanisms shall be processed without undue delay and be subject to human review. Right holders shall reasonably justify their decisions to avoid arbitrary dismissal of complaints. Moreover, in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC, Directive 200/58/EC and the General Data Protection Regulation, the cooperation shall not lead to any identification of individual users nor the processing of their personal data. Member States shall also ensure that users have access to an independent body for the resolution of disputes as well as to a court or another relevant judicial authority to assert the use of an exception or limitation to copyright rules. List of amendments (adopted and non-adopted): http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/report-details.html?reference=A8-0245-2018 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/report-details.html... Vote result of each amendment: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNONSGML%2bPV%2b20180912%2bRES-VOT%2bDOC%2bPDF%2bV0%2f%2fFR&language=EN http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2f... Edit: PDF of all amendments adopted today (includes the full amended text of articles 11 and 13): http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+TA+P8-TA-2018-0337+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//...