The Internet is seen as a bastion of freedom of speech. It is the place where you can say anything about anything on any of the commenting pages. You can share music, videos, code, thoughts or whatever you want.
This may be changing, with Article 13 of the European Union (EU) just passed by the EU Legal Affairs Committee (JURI). If it is finally approved, we will lose her freedom of speech on the internet as we know it today.
Στις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες, το άρθρο 230 του νόμου για την ευελιξία των επικοινωνιών, τμήμα του νόμου περί τηλεπικοινωνιών του 1996, εγγυάται την ελευθερία του λόγου στο Internet. Αυτό σημαίνει ότι "κανένας πάροχος ή user μιας διαδραστικής υπηρεσίας ηλεκτρονικών υπολογιστών δεν αντιμετωπίζεται σαν εκδότης οποιασδήποτε πληροφορίας παρέχεται από άλλον πάροχο ψηφιακών περιεχομένων".
The law is vital, as it provides online platforms with legal protection for most of the content posted by their users. This means that you can say anything you want in the comments, and Reddit, YouTube, or any other site can not be held responsible.
With Article 13, we will see a completely different online world. Every page or service should check every word, sound, video, code, or image to see if it's infringing Copyright. In short, control over everything.
Η "λύση" του άρθρου 13 είναι η επιβολή σε όλους τους ιστότοπους να φιλτράρουν την κάθε δημοσίευση σύμφωνα με μια βάση δεδομένων που περιέχει έργα πνευματικής ιδιοκτησίας. Οι ιστότοποι θα πρέπει επίσης να επιτρέπουν στους κατόχους πνευματικών δικαιωμάτων να ενημερώνουν αυτή τη βάση δεδομένων
Think about it for a moment. You want to write a quick reply to an article, and type it. Then you should expect to see it after it has been censored and does not contain anything copyrighted.
Google and Facebook could create software that could automate it procedure.
But as he points out Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), ακόμη και για τις "πλατφόρμες που καθιερώνουν το φιλτράρισμα, οι χρήστες θα διαπιστώσουν ότι τα βίντεο, ο ήχος, το κείμενο και ο κώδικας που ανεβάζουν, θα παρακολουθείται και ενδέχεται να αποκλείεται αν το αυτοματοποιημένο σύστημα ανιχνεύσει ακόμα και εσφαλμένα ότι παραβιάζει πνευματικά δικαιώματα. Δεν υπάρχει κάποιος τρόπος για ένα αυτοματοποιημένο σύστημα να προσδιορίζει με αξιοπιστία πότε η χρήση ενός δικαιώματος πνευματικής ιδιοκτησίας θα πρέπει να περιοριστεί ή να εξαιρεθεί βάσει του ευρωπαϊκού δικαίου."
In one letter to the EU (PDF) several experts report:
As creators ourselves, we share the concern that there should be a fair sharing of revenues from the online use of copyrighted works, both for creators, publishers and platforms. But it is not the right way to achieve this. By requiring internet platforms to automatically filter content uploaded by their users, Article 13 takes an unprecedented step towards transforming the internet from an open platform tochangeand innovation in a tool for the automated monitoring and control of its users.
Furthermore:
Instead of affecting only the major US Internet platforms (which can afford the cost of compliance), the burden of Article 13 will fall more heavily on their competitors (European companies and SMEs). The cost of installing the necessary auto-filtering technologies will be expensive and burdensome while the necessary technologies have not yet been developed to a point where their reliability is ensured.
The impact of Article 13 will also fall heavily on ordinary Internet platform users who share music or videos, but also on those who upload photos, text or code to the Internet and on collaboration platforms such as Wikipedia and GitHub.
_______________________________
Do not worry, we will write greekglish and misspellings, they will not be able to guess all the possible combinations. : P
What about social media?
Lol
Would it be better, before posting each of our comments, text, observations, to write it on a piece of paper and take it to the local police station for approval?
In fact, would it be better to be temporarily detained at the local police station for a week or two after the text was posted, and someone misunderstood?
Those who are (still) fans of the Nazi EU and globalization, is it a last resort to reconsider their preferences?
the law presupposes automated systems without requiring them. Imagine a social network with moderators-police who will censor. Whatever they do either automatically or with human resources, the results will not be reliable. Of course, the bill still exists because it is advantageous (we do not say names, nor do we show the copyright lobbies, see piracy) regardless of how it will be implemented. I'm very curious to see the application, especially now with the vote against internet neutrality.