Then those parts of UK that were part of the Roman empire would outside the EU, while those parts outside the Roman empire would be in the EU.
The Spanish emperor Hadrian built a wall against the Caledonians, while the Spanish prime minister Rajoy (preoccupied with those pesky Catalan separatists) would veto a Scottish EU membership.
Today, in a vote that split almost every major EU party, Members of the European Parliament adopted every terrible proposal in the new Copyright Directive and rejected every good one, setting the stage for mass, automated surveillance and arbitrary censorship of the internet.
Today, Europe Lost The Internet.
The directive was originally rejected by MEPs in July following criticism of two key provisions: Articles 11 and 13, dubbed the "link tax" and "upload filter" by critics. However, in parliament this morning, an updated version of the directive was approved, along with amended versions of Articles 11 and 13. [...] The directive itself still faces a vote in January 2019 (although experts say it's unlikely it will be rejected). After that it will need to be implemented by individual EU member states, who could very well vary significantly in how they choose to interpret the directive's text.
The proposal requires Member States to establish mechanisms aiming at facilitating the clearance of copyright and related rights in the fields of out-of-commerce works and online exploitation of audiovisual works. Whereas the proposal aims at ensuring a wider access and dissemination of content, it does so while preserving the rights of authors and other rightholders. Several safeguards are put in place to that effect (e.g. opt-out possibilities, preservation of licensing possibilities, participation in the negotiation forum on a voluntary basis). The proposal does not go further than what is necessary to achieve the intended aim while leaving sufficient room for Member States to make decisions as regards the specifics of these mechanisms and does not impose disproportionate costs.
What this law wants?A door opener for mass, automated surveillance and arbitrary censorship of the Internet.
If Article 13 only applies to big companies, it is not so much of a concern, regardless of the stupidity of the particular regulation. Google News is crap anyway.
And I don't believe Google News is a useful or profitable thing anyway, so I'd be fine if Google scrapped the thing entirely.
Not sure what specifically could have been copyrighted in my video
In your case it sounds like a simple false positive.
Page created in 0.046 seconds with 27 queries.