One of the most controversial European legislative procedure has taken the last hurdle: After years of struggle and bargaining, always new tricks and a fierce lobbying battle in the EU is a party to the Council of Ministers of the "Directive on copyright in the digital single market". 19 countries voted in favour, six against, and three abstained.
their supporters say: The Reform creates a fair balance between rightholders and platforms, and ensures that artists and Creative people get more money for their work. The Directive is a threat to the free network, strengthens the Power of the big platforms, and is more likely to use holders such as publishers and record labels as the authors say, their opponents.
In any case, the Internet does not die on Monday, and there will also be live for a few more years. Directives are not directly applicable in the whole EU, but must be implemented by the member States into national law. Switzerland is also not obliged to apply the EU copyright law. Why so many people are afraid of the Reform and how it now goes:
, the Reform Why is it so controversial?
In the centre of the critique of three articles: 15, 16 and 17 (in the previous law listed the texts as 11, 12 and 13). Article 15 says that search engines and other news-have to pay aggregators, publishers, if you are displaying short excerpts from their articles. Similar laws exist in Germany and in Spain. They are considered to be failed, and were for the media because of the court costs and even a loss of business. Big publishers have fought for years for the so-called performance right, and part with wrong representations argued.
Also in article 16, for the benefit of only users and not creators. 2016 of the Federal court of justice had decided that recycling must pay societies such as VG wort income exclusively to the authors and not the publishers. Article 16 would introduce the publisher's participation in Germany and especially freelance journalists damage.
The most violent protests were held against article 17. Hundreds of thousands of people went to (then) article 13 on the road. They fear that he is running on the Upload Filter, which platforms all of the content that users on platforms in the network want to make, in advance. This Software could block mass Uploads to wrong, because machines make mistakes and are not able to detect legal usage. The quote allows the right to use, under certain conditions, the copyright protected content. In addition, the filter could be forced to strengthen the dominance of big platforms like Youtube: Smaller competitors would not be able to develop your own filters and have to buy the Software.
But Filtering in the Directive, but nothing from the Upload?
"The word Upload Filter is not present in this article 17," German Chancellor Angela Merkel said in a question and answer session of the Bundestag. The Argument was heard in the past few months always again to: article 17 is not mandatory the platforms explicitly for Filtering. You could enter into simple contracts with the holders of the rights to the content legally.
What appears in the theory is possible, is likely to be virtually impossible to consistently implement. Maybe Youtube will agree with the Gema, and receives a blow licenses for many sound recordings. But even so, Youtube would still have no certainty, because the Gema doesn't represent all authors. And for texts, photos and Videos, there is no Central collecting society platforms to negotiate thousands of contracts. For Youtube, this is difficult for smaller operators, it is likely to be impossible. Therefore, approximately almost 500 Online forums warn of the impact of article 17.
The Directive requires all commercial platforms, the user-generated-content publishing, "in accordance with high industry Standards for professional diligence, all efforts" to prevent copyright infringement. Otherwise, the operator liable. The only way to prevent this, are well-to-Upload-Filter.
What do the platforms now?
at the beginning of April, made statements from Emmett Shear, the chief of the live-streaming platform Twitch, the round in the network. In several Interviews, he had warned that Twitch to see through the Reform forced to implement Upload filters. Consider even Geoblocking: "If someone is streaming in the United States, will be filtered the European users from the Stream out," said Shear.
The excitement was big and exaggerated. Later, Twitch made it clear that Shear had announced no concrete measures. He only want to inform, what can be the consequences of the Reform. The member States would have to first work to implement the Directive. The company will develop "smart solutions" for users in Europe.
Twitch seems to be this attitude is representative of the many platforms: don't rush, wait and see. It is still unclear how the requirements of the Reform will be poured into national law. Until something changes, it will take – and probably the changes are not permanent: Multiple parties and organisations have already announced lawsuits. Already in 2012, the ECJ Upload has declared a Filter for a reason, unlawful.
How strong is the network?
This is currently difficult to predict. The impact could be less severe, as many opponents fear. It is clear that the EU's targeted political censorship. The aim of the Reform is not it, opinions to the press, but money redistribute: of platforms to be Creative. Much suggests, however, that in the first place, the music, Film and the media industry benefits, so big publishers, Labels, Studios, and collecting societies. The copyright reform is a Reform for recyclers.
Already Upload filters are in use. Microsoft's Photo-DNA recognizes and blocks all recordings of child abuse. That works relatively reliably, however, the decision is much easier: child pornography is always illegal, copyrighted content can be legally used. This is also why YouTube's filtering system, Content-ID deletes to regularly wrong Uploads – although Google has invested more than $ 100 million in the technology. So, you can assume that more extensive, more complex filters will still make more mistakes.
in addition to these known systems, there are other providers of filtering software. Spiegel Online spoke with several companies whose products are already in use. The Software was working "extremely accurate", the False-Positive Rate of "effectively zero". That sounds good, there are questions, however, remain open: first, there are only allegations that do not check. Secondly, a very low error rate, given the mass of Uploads in absolute Numbers to many wrongful bans. Thirdly, it may be seen from the Software the individual works reliably, but for the right of quotation is not created. If users embed a copyrighted content is legal in a parody or Review, suggests the machine anyway.
The Directive such cases, but it is silent about how this can be technically implemented should take. The law can't make the Software better than it is. In order to be legally on the safe side, could platforms, filtering, therefore, rather too much than too little. Finally, penalties for illegal content to stay online – not for legal content to be deleted.
What do the governments of the EU member States now?
In contrast to regulations, directives enter into force immediately. Germany and the 27 other member States of the EU have two years to comply with the provisions of their national law. You have certain freedoms that are not allowed to change the core of the Directive.
article 17 foresees some exceptions for platforms that are younger than three years, and at the same time, a maximum of 10 million euros per year to implement. These provisions must also exist in the national legislation. Thus, the EU wants to prevent a patchwork of different individual creates laws. Especially in the case of a Directive, which relates to the digital space, that would be absurd: The World Wide Web is not interested in national borders.
What are the consequences of the new EU legislation for Switzerland?
As a Non-EU country will the new EU copyright laws, it is once in force, will not apply in Switzerland, in theory. Because it is hardly to be expected that large international companies are developing the EU-required upload filter, but not for Switzerland apply. Rather, it is to be assumed that Switzerland is treated like the other EU countries.
The Swiss copyright law is also under Revision. However, at the beginning of March, the Council of States had sent the submission back to the responsible Commission with the mandate to review their Decisions and to take account of the current legal developments in the EU.
reason is a controversial Supplement, which was attached to the competent Commission wants to introduce a compensation scheme like the one the EU wants to make the term performance protection law.
the news Agency sda Supplemented with Material. (editor-in-Tamedia)
Created: 15.04.2019, 11:17 PM