4 ms·
One commenter in the OP article pointed an interesting aspect of it: it's widely required, and considered totally feasible to preemptively filter pornography fr
by bgarbiak 8y ago
One commenter in the OP article pointed an interesting aspect of it: it's widely required, and considered totally feasible to preemptively filter pornography from the user uploaded stuff, and yet: even the giants like YouTube will fall under the burden of copyright filters demanded by EU.
No wonder then that politics usually introduce laws related the Internet under the "safe the children" slogan. It really does changes the perception.
- christopherwxyz 8y agoHot dog or not hot dog?
- eridius 8y agoAn "is this child pornography" filter is a wildly different beast than "is this copyright infringement". The crucial difference is something either is or is not child pornography, regardless of context. But whether something is copyright infringement depends on a whole variety of factors, and the exact same content uploaded by two different people might be a violation in one case and not in the other.
- bgarbiak 8y agoOf course, child porn is easier to identify. For a human eye. Also, in case of Apple and their App Store it’s not only CP, it is all kind of NSFW content that has to be filtered out. And that can be nuanced. It appears that for now the filter mechanism is simple: the content is scanned against known database of bad stuff. So, a twist on a Content ID.