Here’s the happy ending to Bert’s drive for a government-regulated “Net
Neutrality” scheme.
Cheers,
John
https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/12/17849868/eu-internet-copyright-reform-article-11-13-approved
The European Parliament has voted in favor of the Copyright Directive, a
controversial piece of legislation intended to update online copyright laws for
the internet age.
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 final vote was 438 in favor and 226 against.
The fallout from this decision will be far-reaching, and take a long time to
settle. The directive itself still faces a final 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 most important parts of this are Articles 11 and 13. Article 11 is intended
to give publishers and papers a way to make money when companies like Google
link to their stories, allowing them to demand paid licenses. Article 13
requires certain platforms like YouTube and Facebook stop users sharing
unlicensed copyrighted material.
Critics of the Copyright Directive say these provisions are disastrous. In the
case of Article 11, they note that attempts to “tax” platforms like Google News
for sharing articles have repeatedly failed, and that the system would be ripe
to abuse by copyright trolls.
Article 13, they say, is even worse. The legislation requires that platforms
proactively work with rightsholders to stop users uploading copyrighted
content. The only way to do so would be to scan all data being uploaded to
sites like YouTube and Facebook. This would create an incredible burden for
small platforms, and could be used as a mechanism for widespread censorship.
This is why figures like Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales and World Wide Web
inventor Tim Berners-Lee came out so strongly against the directive.
However, those backing these provisions say the arguments above are the result
of scaremongering by big US tech companies, eager to keep control of the web’s
biggest platforms. They point to existing laws and amendments to the directive
as proof it won’t be abused in this way. These include exemptions for sites
like GitHub and Wikipedia from Article 13, and exceptions to the “link tax”
that allow for the sharing of mere hyperlinks and “individual words” describing
articles without constraint.
In remarks following the vote in Parliament this morning, MEP Axel Voss, who
has led the charge on Articles 11 and 13, thanked his fellow politicians “for
the job we have done together.” “This is a good sign for the creative
industries in Europe,” said Voss. Opposing MEPs like Julia Reda of the Pirate
Party described the outcome as “catastrophic.”
Despite these disagreements, what’s clear is that if the Copyright Directive
receives final approval by the European Parliament in January, it will have a
huge, disruptive impact on the internet, both in the European Union and around
the world. Exactly how the legislation will be interpreted will be up to
individual nations, but the shift in the balance of power is clear: the web’s
biggest tech companies are losing their grip on the internet.