7 ms·

> Article 13 only affects for-profit platforms that host and share copyrighted material. For now, but where will it stop (or will it)? Another commentor pointe

• Funes- 8y ago
  >Another commentor pointed out that even small services running ads to pay for hosting could be considered "for-profit" If those small services' main purpose is "enabling users to upload and share a large amount of copyright-protected content with the purpose of obtaining profit from that activity", then they are turning a profit from copyright infringement, whether it is to pay for their hosting or not, so they will be targeted, as the document establishes. That's my take on it, at least, but I think it is quite clear.
  • dannyobrien 8y ago
    Everything online is “copyright-protected”. Copyright automatically applies to anything fixed in a tangible medium of expression. So it applies to any service that lets you share content.
• ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  Copyright enforcement has always been about going after big abuses. With some incredibly rare exceptions, generally speaking, nobody has ever been at serious risk for sending one copy of a movie or music CD to a friend. There is too much sharing and too many individual parties to chase after every way people technically violate copyright law. Many of the cases out there involved people sharing on a large scale. Examples like The Pirate Bay or Sci-Hub or Aaron Swartz, which involve distribution of large amounts of content to large numbers of people. The smaller the platform, the less anyone will care about it, even if it is distributing a little bit of copyrighted content. Small scale copyright violation is so widespread, and the benefits of fighting individual cases of it so small, that there's simply no value to taking it on and they aren't bothering.
  • reitanqild 8y ago
    There's been a lot of shady copyright trolling against bittorrent users.
    • ocdtrekkie 8y ago
      Arguably, BitTorrent is mass distribution of, frequently, large numbers of files, by design. That being said, I think you see a lot more activity against the torrent tracker sites than individual seeders, and it's exceedingly unlikely someone who just leeches would see any sort of legal harassment.
      • kupfer 8y ago
        The last part depends highly on your location. In Germany there are law firms specialized in watching popular torrents. They make millions from threatening users with legal proceedings and if you leech popular content you're more likely than not to get a letter from them.
  • mcv 8y ago
    10-15 years ago there were a lot of stories about teenagers getting sued for ridiculous sums for sharing a song.
    • fock 8y ago
      yet nothing in the reform prevents laws which base the fines on missed revenue.
  • cromwellian 8y ago
    I once clicked on a Torrent for a Disney movie. A day later, I received a notice from Comcast that I have 1 out of 5 strikes of accessing copyrighted content, and if I hit 5, my internet access will be terminated. ISPs will be forced into doing more of this if piracy becomes large scale decentralized, which it will. Copyright enforcement is about ambulance chasing. Small time channels, like game streamers, who happen to have captured a game that has a music soundtrack, have received DMCA takedown requests. What we're witnessing here is a misplaced "I hate big tech, so therefore I support anything I perceive as targeting them" resulting in collateral damage that makes every one else's life harder, benefiting mostly rent-seeking big publishers. The decentralization-will-fix-it cryptoanarchy workaround is a pipe dream. Every so often people imagine an unbreakable piracy distributed darknet will circumvent laws and make piracy safe and convenient for everyone, but the reality is, as soon as it becomes the dominant form, the powers that be will turn their attention to it, and the attempts to crack down on it will be far far more invasive and surveillance heavy. Just ask Napster, LimeWire, Scour, Kazaa, Grokster, Madster, and eDonkey2000, all of which were brought down by injunctions.