Jump to content
Banner by ~ Ice Princess Silky

EU Article 13 will impact creative freedom on the internet


flutterbard

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, goofyg65 said:

well let me ask you this Jeric. why do we follow eu rules under obligation.

To prevent fines. Also an international ISP can be directed to block traffic to foreign sites. The site's hosting provider can receive a complaint which we would have to respond to. Counties do have a lot of remedies to interfer with foreign sites. Are there ways around that? Sure. Does it hurt traffic? Sure does. Is it a PITA? Absolutely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
30 minutes ago, goofyg65 said:

unless it says the usa will pursue i am not worried one single bit. this is a eu law not a us law

 

23 minutes ago, goofyg65 said:

yes but i thought this was a Canadian website.

That's not exactly how the internet works. See sites will actually be forced to change or be modified to match the laws for the EU so that their EU guests will be accommodated. In other words if you are a website owner you now have two choices:

  1. Lock out your EU guests entirely meaning that you basically will be shutting down a part of your potential fanbase (which is very bad for sites that are trying to make money to survive through ads or other services)
  2. Limit the site for everyone.
10 minutes ago, goofyg65 said:

well let me ask you this Jeric. why do we follow eu rules under obligation.

Because the site has EU users. Unless you're suggesting we just lock out the EU users which would basically be throwing a ton of the userbase in the trash saying "sorry, you're not allowed here anymore".

 

Also the issue is that laws like this will bleed to the US eventually considering the US is already trying to pass strict internet laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the EU was all about stuff like trade and dealing with foreign nations, when did they get so controlling about simple stuff like the internet? That's just stupid, this better not pass, I think someone needs to do some checks and balances in the EU as they seem to think they're some authoritarian government that can just sensor and charge people for using simple services, things like this is why people dislike the EU :baconmane:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest

It's hilarious that people think this won't affect them just because they don't live in the EU. Not realizing the EU is the second largest economic entity in the world, controls massive trade and has tons of people. If you think cutting off one of the biggest unions on the planet from using the full range of the internet won't affect you, then I am eager to see how you react if this goes through and starts hitting the things you love. I can't wait to watch you scream for help but there will be no one from the EU to back you up, because you turned your back on them when they needed you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Newsflash update:

European Parliment has rejected the PE Law Commission and temporarily suspended the works on the directive.

The topic will be picked up again on plenar session held in September.

Edit: 278 representatives supported the project, 318 were against it. 31 did not vote. This is a marginal victory. Issue with EU anf Brussel is that they won't let go. They worked hard on it so they will vote and vote until it passes through.

  • Brohoof 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Guess it's time to bring this one up before duplicates start appearing around~

 

The story continues for the worse this time. Not only did the EU initially pass both article 13 and 11, but they have also outright discarded any and all amendments proposed to these articles, devised to find middle ground between the parties demanding this change and the rest of the population.

 

Effectively, everyone, including the forums itself, will feel the impact of the articles being passed by EU government. For US, some of the reasons are stated above between conversation with Taze and Jeric. For EU, well... basically this means more expensive internet, gigantic companies monopoly on its certain spheres, censorship of content and site access, faulty filters, issues with browsing and enormous limitations to data and information sharing. Another successfull attempt of limiting the population's ability to unite against the common cause, as whatever fishy happens in the world now, you will most probably not be able to share it with anybody, as sharing links will be banned. No more inconvenient and annoying threads about scandals and corruption.

The greedy artists along with a number of major companies lobbied for the changes. However there were some who saw what they will bring. Wyclef Jean comes to mind as one, as he was openly stating the internet should be embraced and improved, and stated that the articles are step in opposite direction, to hinder and block it. How come there are artists who do not have issues with article failing?

This is rhetorical for me, and what I will say next is only my and my own opinion and conclusion. You are free to challenge it and pick it apart of course, stating an opinion does not mean I cut myself off from any criticism. Greed and money. Sure artists lose a lot due to internet, but that does not mean they earn little either. In my eyes, if they support the articles, they don't care about the damage it'll do. They only care about their own additional money. Newsflash: If you are not earning enough when you're considered a star... maybe you don't deserve to be one. And maybe you should become a better artist then.

  • Brohoof 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Join the herd!

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...