Not that I want to worry old Buckethead

[Grumpmeister]

But given how much crap we post and link to on here are these new reforms going to cause any problems? 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44412025

[Barman]

But given how much crap we post and link to on here are these new reforms going to cause any problems? 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44412025

It could kill the interwebz... thank fuck we're leaving eh....? 

[Steve]

But given how much crap we post and link to on here are these new reforms going to cause any problems? 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44412025

It could kill the interwebz... thank fuck we're leaving eh....? 

Yep EU dumbness but not sure leaving has any practical benefit.  If Arsebook is forced to filter in the EU it'll likely filter here as well.  And anyway you're not leaving, we are (although that keeps getting kicked down the road, 2021 now).

Looks like an idiot over reaction to a real problem.  Truth is instinctively we human beings just don't recognise intellectual property as property and copying it as theft - but too often it is and there's no angels, we all steal it to a degree.

[Grumpmeister]

I'd been seeing a lot of panicked reactions to it along the lines of killing content providers abilities for fair usage but wasn't sure if there would be more damage that it could do. The cynic in me suspects that this was a blinkered plan intended as more of a 'subtle' cash grab than anything else. After all if licence holders in the EU are getting more in royalties then they are eligible to pay more in tax. 

[Grumpmeister]

Well surprise surprise it's been passed. 

[Barman]

Well surprise surprise it's been passed. 

Colour me shocked. I think it failed in July so they had to have another vote... to get the right answer like...

[Grumpmeister]

It gets worse, granted this seems to be a far more subtle and worrying approach to censorship.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/22/youtube-susan-wojcicki-creators-protest-eu-article-13-copyright-law.html

This essentially prices small content creators out of Youtube as the company will not be able to afford the risk of possible penalties and so would end up having to cater to large companies only. Given just how many dissenting voices and EU sceptics are small content creators this becomes a win win law for Brussels. 

[Steve]

It gets worse, granted this seems to be a far more subtle and worrying approach to censorship.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/22/youtube-susan-wojcicki-creators-protest-eu-article-13-copyright-law.html

This essentially prices small content creators out of Youtube as the company will not be able to afford the risk of possible penalties and so would end up having to cater to large companies only. Given just how many dissenting voices and EU sceptics are small content creators this becomes a win win law for Brussels. 

So are you saying Intellectual Property creators have to give away their stuff for free?

It's not a black and white issue and we all copy in pictures etc that someone else created.  But some of the stuff going on is seriously taking the piss with reusing long video extracts in YouTube feeds with Ads rewarding the copier.  Someone needs to define a fair use policy rather than a blanket clamp down but some of these copyright abusers (and they come from all viewpoints) need to stop.

[Grumpmeister]

No I'm not saying that they have to give up their properties for free, but this approach is so ill thought out that it would be funny if not for just how much damage it is going to do. Yes, there are those on Youtube who take the piss with IP but there are also those who follow the fair use guidelines who will also be penalised as a result. Not to mention just how open to abuse this system has the potential to be. Any IP holder could use these laws to hammer any small content creator that reviews their products if they give a negative review by revoking their license, and that's without what is obviously going to be an extortionate amount to get each single licence as they won't waste the chance to make money by creating a blanket one.

[Steve]

No I'm not saying that they have to give up their properties for free, but this approach is so ill thought out that it would be funny if not for just how much damage it is going to do. Yes, there are those on Youtube who take the piss with IP but there are also those who follow the fair use guidelines who will also be penalised as a result. Not to mention just how open to abuse this system has the potential to be. Any IP holder could use these laws to hammer any small content creator that reviews their products if they give a negative review by revoking their license, and that's without what is obviously going to be an extortionate amount to get each single licence as they won't waste the chance to make money by creating a blanket one.

I'd never read those guidelines before.  Useful but they certainly aren't rules to give clear this is OK/this isn't decisions and then there's the issue of just who has the authority to issue any such binding guidelines

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6396261?hl=en-GB