3 ms·

Then why not give newspapers the same protection if that is the issue, it's preferable to throwing the baby with bathwater so to speak.

by srkmno 8y ago

Barrin92 8y ago
If I have the choice between making Youtube more like a newspaper or making my newspaper more like Youtube, I at least know which option I would prefer. Many people here seem to take the notion of a content loss in Europe as bad for granted. I see it as quite positive. If we can replace generic, low quality content with more space for people who do not just ride on copyright but provide genuinely new content, I would consider this to be very positive. Maybe this opens up a space to have more European content on Youtube instead of just having the same generic content dominate the website that is subject to these copyright battles. The incentive for Youtube is clear, they want to make as much money and generate as much content as possible, with little attention paid to the fact whether the content is educational, regionally relevant, authentic, or original. It seems obvious to me that a Youtube that might be smaller, less profit or attention oriented, and less commercialized is not in their interest. The one exception I would make here is scientific or academic content, which should be granted strong protections.
- ArchTypical 8y ago
  > If we can replace generic, low quality content... When you put up guardrails (so many that people can't even keep up to date with what the automated system detects), that's exactly what you get. The words and images of countless properties would have to be filtered and pulled. Regardless of what we would hope to happen, people simply ride whatever bland waves generate the most views. This is partly why we have streams of people eating and such, although the "newsy" channels would be hamstrung by this, you can imagine even the "food" streams would be impacted if they dared to say or show the icon of the food they are eating! This is the technological culmination of capitalistic corruption of freedom vis a vis intellectual property.
  - exergy 8y ago
    That's a really good point. While I would like to see the online platform/publishers be held more accountable, in this instance I don't see how the EU can do that without inevitably leading to the scenario that you talk about.

Then why not give newspapers the same protection if that is the issue, it's preferable to throwing the baby with bathwater so to speak.

by srkmno 8y ago

Then why not give newspapers the same protection if that is the issue, it's preferable to throwing the baby with bathwater so to speak.

Barrin92 8y ago

If I have the choice between making Youtube more like a newspaper or making my newspaper more like Youtube, I at least know which option I would prefer. Many people here seem to take the notion of a content loss in Europe as bad for granted. I see it as quite positive. If we can replace generic, low quality content with more space for people who do not just ride on copyright but provide genuinely new content, I would consider this to be very positive. Maybe this opens up a space to have more European content on Youtube instead of just having the same generic content dominate the website that is subject to these copyright battles. The incentive for Youtube is clear, they want to make as much money and generate as much content as possible, with little attention paid to the fact whether the content is educational, regionally relevant, authentic, or original. It seems obvious to me that a Youtube that might be smaller, less profit or attention oriented, and less commercialized is not in their interest. The one exception I would make here is scientific or academic content, which should be granted strong protections.

ArchTypical 8y ago
> If we can replace generic, low quality content... When you put up guardrails (so many that people can't even keep up to date with what the automated system detects), that's exactly what you get. The words and images of countless properties would have to be filtered and pulled. Regardless of what we would hope to happen, people simply ride whatever bland waves generate the most views. This is partly why we have streams of people eating and such, although the "newsy" channels would be hamstrung by this, you can imagine even the "food" streams would be impacted if they dared to say or show the icon of the food they are eating! This is the technological culmination of capitalistic corruption of freedom vis a vis intellectual property.
- exergy 8y ago
  That's a really good point. While I would like to see the online platform/publishers be held more accountable, in this instance I don't see how the EU can do that without inevitably leading to the scenario that you talk about.