Skip to main content

Topic: What's Going on in Europe (Read 95784 times)

What's Going on in Europe
Portugal is weeping, Geert Wilders Says Netherlands Would Be Better Off if It Left 28-Nation Bloc, France can't compete with Germany, Merkel is pissed at Obama, Belgium is ousting Afgans. Is anybody happy?

  • Belfrager
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1150
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.
Indeed.
Well, in today's four blocks world I do understand European located people wanting to join the EU and they are certainly welcome.

Until now, it seems that the Brexit makes more damages inside the UK than to achieve any of its objectives. We'll see for how long they'll remain "United".
A matter of attitude.

  • krake
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1151
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.

Prime minister Rajoy?
You probably meant ex-prime minister Rajoy.

  • jax
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1152
He's not the current prime minister, just like there isn't any current referendum on Scottish independence.

  • krake
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1153
The actual prime minister would veto a Scottish EU membership too. For the same reason.
Franco's legacy is well alive in Spain. There is still a long way to go till democracy, even a guided one like most European countries (including mine) have.

  • krake
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1154
Today, Europe Lost The Internet.

Quote
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.

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1155
Today, Europe Lost The Internet.
Not quite yet.
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.
There are so many votings on things (and even more votings on slightly amended things), that even just to be an onlooker of the process it makes one's head spin. Much more so for those members of parliament who participate in those votings. They have lost track what they are voting on, they hardly care anymore.

After the votings, final and more final, it takes a bit time for the thing to take legal effect. And a while after that the accumulating judicial practice will show what the effect is. Some laws are worded surprisingly straightforwardly, but hardly impress the court. In this case, the wording is not even straightforward. For example,
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.
From this, I cannot figure out what this law wants. The first sentence requires facilitating the rights of copyright holders. The second sentence allegedly aims to ensure wider access and dissemination of content, the diametrically opposite goal. The third sentence proposes safeguards "to that effect" - which effect? the first one or the second one? And so on contradiction upon contradiction. (Yes, I get it that the real aim is to enable copyright holders have their way and the rest is just waffle. All I am saying is that this waffle is highly distracting and I empathise with the poor members of parliament who cannot make head or tails of what they are voting for.)

Eventually, it will only matter what deeds and whose deeds will be punishable and who will be rewarded. This will depend on the effectiveness of the local police and courts.

  • krake
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1156
What this law wants?
A door opener for mass, automated surveillance and arbitrary censorship of the Internet.
The whole shit gets wrapped into the Copright Directive to make it less visible.

  • Belfrager
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1157
What this law wants?
A door opener for mass, automated surveillance and arbitrary censorship of the Internet.
I believe so.
It's a modern society characteristic, not exclusive to the EU. In fact, I think that European citizens are the sole ones in the world who can still impose some respect to their governments but much more acting is needed.

Citizen's rights organizations must absolutely give no rest to the governments and expose all lobbyist actions constantly taken by obscure organizations pursuing an unacceptable attempt of population enslavement under technological domination.

Is my opinion that, at least for some time, political parties all over Europe should give place to these very active freedom organizations. It's a matter of survival, our own survival.
A matter of attitude.

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1158
What this law wants?
A door opener for mass, automated surveillance and arbitrary censorship of the Internet.
All that is already possible. On mass scale. They are perfecting an existing framework.

After having searched about it a bit further, it (Article 13 in particular) appears to have emerged due to European mainstream media's dispute with Google News. They wanted Google News to pay to them for aggregating their content. 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.

A much bigger issue - copyright terms for at least 3/4 of century and burden of proof on the suspect - was pushed through since the beginning without much controversy, and from then on everything was lost. Some things are regulated in the way that are both obvious for everyone and obviously wrong, such as the cookie directive, but these are small things in the big picture. These are finishing touches right now. Our legislators have already confirmed that the citizens swallow everything, absolutely everything, with an occasional negligible protest.
  • Last Edit: 2018-09-13, 14:31:03 by ersi

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1159
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.
A Dutch or Belgian (Dutch-lingual) politician in favor, I'm going to rjhowie a bit here because I forget the details, said that while not perfect copyright was basically the best they had to go after Google. It seemed a bit specious to me but I guess we'll see.

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1160
@Frenzie From all the international newsing around the directive, it appears that the original issue that gave rise to the Article 13 specifically was rather narrow, even petty. It was apparently because Spain wanted to put a tax on the local version of Google News, because the local media companies lobbied against the local version of Google News. In response, Google News pulled out of Spain.

On the EU level, the reasoning seems to have gone as follows: We love taxes like Spain attempted, and no way Google News would pull out of entire Europe. They forget that there is a counterexample in the form of some American media outlets who squarely block access to Europeans due to the cookie directive (try for example latimes.com). So yes, Google News could pull out of all Europe. 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.

Further, making EU-wide sweeping directives in response to a petty issue like this is an abject moronicity on the part of our dear MEPs. Did they even try to limit the formulation so that it would specifically address the issue at hand, without unintended consequences? Apparently not. I am positive that they are actually used to going overboard like this, because there is no law that would punish making wrong and stupid laws. Or making laws originally catering to a narrow lobby group, but with sweeping formulation that may affect everyone who knows how.


This here appears to be a similar issue: French booksellers think that literature prizes are for booksellers, not for authors, so it's a no-no to prize a work that has not been published by a mainstream publisher https://www.france24.com/en/20180912-france-literature-book-prize-renaudot-amazon-koskas-bookshops

The entire framework of taxes and incentives on the publishing market caters to the bookseller and publisher lobby in France, so much so that they think that a literature prize is one of the incentives to promote book sales, not for writers for writing a good book.

In this scheme, replace "publisher" with "content creator" in journalistic commentary, assume that "content creator" also means authors, and it will fit the current copyright debate. Journalists tend to fetch far too; in legalese, specifically in the directive under discussion, there are no content creators, there are "rightholders", so it only applies to copyright holders such as publishers, not to occasional authors or artists. A hobby artist or writer is not necessarily a rightholder. An "influencer" on Instagram, even though taking pics of him/herself and around, may easily breach against rightholders as rules around objects get stricter.

The copyright directives roll over individual content creators, without paying any attention. They only care about certified rightholders, so much so that they want to institute pre-censorship across the board, to be implemented by the distributing platforms such as Instagram and Facebook. On a personal note, in my experience such a pre-censorship is already in place. Once upon a time in a restaurant in America I filmed a rotating fan in the ceiling for a minute. Some Latino soap opera was playing a bit further away in the background on TV. Then I tried to upload the video the on FB, but I was faced with the warning that it included something copyrighted, so no go. Not sure what specifically could have been copyrighted in my video: the fan? the sound from TV that was barely audible so you could not make out the words? There were no persons in the video, no TV set,  there was a corner of an abstract-ish painting, well, something was there that made the video blockable. Could it be that TV sets emit, along with the sound, some additional signal that says "this noise is copyrighted"? Anyway, pre-censorhip on FB is already a reality, even though it's a hit and miss, more of a miss than a hit and will surely not improve.

There is no use of being afraid what would happen if pre-censorship of uploads arrived. Pre-censorship is already here, but in patches, not quite everywhere. It is definitely on FB, Instagram, and Twitter, and in the US more than in the EU.
  • Last Edit: 2018-09-14, 07:11:49 by ersi

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1161
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.
+1

Not sure what specifically could have been copyrighted in my video
In your case it sounds like a simple false positive. It probably thought the fan was from some noirish film or something.

Compare movie studios taking down their own freaking trailers for containing "copyrighted material." There's no human involvement in these matters, or if there is they have like 5-10 seconds to judge plus a directive to err on the side of caution, making the end result the same.

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: What's Going on in Europe
Reply #1162
In your case it sounds like a simple false positive.
This much I could figure out myself on that very instant. The fun fact is that we get notified about the positive, false or otherwise, but not about the policy that everything you attempt to upload gets automatically scanned. Admittedly I have not read the user agreement, but I am quite sure there is nothing about that pre-censorship is the norm there.