This but unironically
1 Like
1 Like
that´s exactly the point, though!
This new EU law is aiming at procting BOTH - the original IP while still granting “fair use” rights.
the issue:
it´s not that simple on a technical level.
automated filters WILL make mistakes and filter out content that only references/samples protected material even though it would be protected under “fair use”…
How would that work?
Unfortunately it won’t because human nature.
That’s why I stayed it ironically, to convey a notion while avoiding the inevitable slam down…
It’s not going to be easy to implement but it principle I’d be happy to see people create things receive renumeration.
At the moment you have google (youtube), facebook etc. making huge profits by hosting other peoples IP while harvesting+selling the data of users and bullshit content aggregator ‘brands’ like Fuck Jerry & Majestic Casual who get rich from other people’s IP while the creators of things people value get next to nothing.
Haha 
i know you a little by now Mike
1 Like
Nah. CB went digital a few years ago just so they could fit in twice as many channels. It just doesn’t sound the same as old the analog units.
2 Likes
That’s how I read it. I imagine this will cut off income streams for many independent content creators, to the benefit for large media conglomerates. Conveniently, it also seems as if it will facilitate censorship.
3 Likes
It probably isn’t about musician’s interests, as musicians can’t afford that many lawyers 
quite amused by the idea that preventing people sampling and mashing things up will promote creativity - the music industry did this to hip hop and now every single record is the exact same 808 bass and snare roll.
5 Likes
Open Mike
Resident Electrohippy… 
I’m not really a full on hippy, but close enough for jazz… 
#HippyTech
2 Likes
The Japanese would think our yes and no on the PlayStation is wrong in the US
Interesting discussion as it has many sides. So there is no easy answer i think. And i’m still not sure where i stand.
I think its very important to regulate things so original content creaters can earn a normal living. And i think the big internet platforms do a bad job in taking care of that. On the other hand internet platforms can provide a way of collaborations and information sharing (like this forum) which can empower those same content creaters.
The way those platforms work and make money is a very important part i think.
The argument that it is technological impossible seems to me of very little importance (im a webdeveloper myself so i know that it is very difficult). The (im)possibility of a technique should not be an argument in a moral discussion of what is good or bad. If it’s impossible for a platform to do it ‘right’ maybe there is something wrong with the platform itself.
Just my 2 cents…
1 Like
1 Like
it was a figure of speech. I don’t think making sampling prohibitively expensive has made hip hop more inventive in general.
(whether that Ghostpoet record is Hip hop so much as a record with some rapping on it is a moot point, I do of course accept there is some inventive hip hop still in existence…)
These are just musings, but sampling is usually based around re-flipping something in a creative way.
I suspect this legislation is basically led by big rights owning businesses trying to protect their catalogue rights. And the Spotify experience suggests they won’t exactly rush to pass on most of that to the original writers/performers.
On the other hand, independent creators already won’t necessarily see their due, and there is very definitely an argument that red tape and legislation generally makes it harder to do so by restricting creative space to those that can afford to check and clear everything.
if anyone does the “i’m just going to jack your whole work intact and not pay you” thing, it’s usually big companies that know they can get away with it (“Knights of the Jaguar” anyone?)
And pretty much always you have to have the lawyers to defend your copyright, or you’re not getting anywhere anyway. I dunno if copyright genuinely works in favour of the little guy all that often really.
1 Like
Just take a long enough sample of white noise and you will trigger the filters:
The problem with §13 is that if you (as a company) want to be on the safe side you need to prevent any uploads with even a very low probability of being a copyright violation (or at least prevent it from showing on screens in the EU).
Additionally only large companies can effort the necessary infrastructure, so this law also prevents any related startup from the get-go. It’s monopoly all over again.
But great times for VPN companies I’ll guess …
(… and bad times for the speed of the TOR browser, because everyone and their grandma starts watching videos through the TOR network)
8 Likes
I agree with this, but then maybe what you need is some kind of blockchain-y type solution.
which won’t happen because the current situation works fine for the big companies.
The legal side of copyright is very easy. It’s black & white and about as un-complicated as it gets as far as laws go.
If we want to decide that people who use the internet, and the companies that provide internet services, abide by the laws of the land, then the laws must be enforced. Whether it’s sampling or internet memes, if you’re using somebody else’s original material without permission, it’s a breach of copyright, and you are on the wrong side of the law. Simple.
Google & Youtube have been lobbying for years to loosen copyright restrictions, and that’s not good for rights holders. I don’t know if this Article 13 is the answer, I’ve not read it in detail, but as far as unlicensed usage of music goes, this seems like at least a good step in the right direction for protecting copyright.
Until the legal rights of “copyright” change, it is what it is. We either enforce it, like other laws, or change the law - currently, Google & Youtube seem to abet the breaking of copyright like crazy, if this article puts the brakes on these companies, all for it. They’ll break a lot of things, Youtube most assuredly, but that’s on them to implement a solution that works for them and their content-creators & viewers, and keeps them in accordance with copyright laws.