More crap for webmasters and anyone else in the business...

[colinsunderland]

If you didn't have an EU the big corporations pushing for this law change would have had to lobby each individual country's parliament and get the copyright law passed through, without amendment.

So the EU makes it far easier for an oligarchy to rule Europe, you've only got to win one vote and there are ways you can do this, pressure, blackmail, bribe etc...

Theres no way the UK would have objected to this anyway

 

[mack341]

Theres no way the UK would have objected to this anyway

It might have been amended, and debated in the house of lords too...the proposed law would have to pass through far more scrutiny if each individual country's parliament voted on it. The EU is an oligarch's dream set up.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

The UK actually just voted it through, so I don't see that we'd have done much extra debating or amending.....

And we're on the same side as the Germans, which is a nice note of harmony in these fractious Brexit times.

 

[mack341]

The UK actually just voted it through, so I don't see that we'd have done much extra debating or amending.....

And we're on the same side as the Germans, which is a nice note of harmony in these fractious Brexit times.

(In fact, looking at the numbers, if the UK had voted against, it would have failed to pass, so we have loads of influence in Europe, we just chose not to use it.)

View attachment 107482

Chopley you like this new copyright law then? I can't seem to find any articles etc.. in favour of it, it seems to just = more regulation/control over the internet.

But I'm all for youtube having to share some more of their massive profit with the original copyright holders of material that garners views, but that issue could've been simply remedied I think.

 

[goatwack]

Yes good luck regulating millions of users' content. That'll be the day

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Chopley you like this new copyright law then? I can't seem to find any articles etc.. in favour of it, it seems to just = more regulation/control over the internet.

Honestly mack, I don't know enough about it to really pass comment. I'll get involved in a Brexit debate because I consider myself to be reasonably well informed after three years of following it very closely, but when it comes to this new copyright directive I just don't have the knowledge to reach an intelligent judgement.

I was simply noting that the UK waved it through, so it's not like the EU is foisting this upon us against our will, since the UK used its vote to actually vote in favour of it.

 

[mack341]

Honestly mack, I don't know enough about it to really pass comment. I'll get involved in a Brexit debate because I consider myself to be reasonably well informed after three years of following it very closely, but when it comes to this new copyright directive I just don't have the knowledge to reach an intelligent judgement.

I was simply noting that the UK waved it through, so it's not like the EU is foisting this upon us against our will, since the UK used its vote to actually vote in favour of it.

That's not quite the same though as our mp's, who we can vote in or out, debating and passing it.

Presumably the person representing the uk govt voted for it, and as can be clearly seen with Mrs May's Brexit deal the uk govt/civil service have different ideas to the british people of what's in their best interests.

edit: I must admit I don't really know much about the law other than it could affect free speech as it limits use of copyright material, so referring to a newspaper article on this forum will likely have to be done differently than before. I hoped Colinsunderland was going to explain it and save me the bother of trying to read up on it

 

[colinsunderland]

That's not quite the same though as our mp's, who we can vote in or out, debating and passing it.

Presumably the person representing the uk govt voted for it, and as can be clearly seen with Mrs May's Brexit deal the uk govt/civil service have different ideas to the british people of what's in their best interests.

edit: I must admit I don't really know much about the law other than it could affect free speech as it limits use of copyright material, so referring to a newspaper article on this forum will likely have to be done differently than before. I hoped Colinsunderland was going to explain it and save me the bother of trying to read up on it

Too much to type lol, plus I haven't read it all properly yet

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

That gives a rough idea.

 

[mack341]

Apparently a part of it means businesses will need to ensure all content uploaded to their services is completely protected and if not, they must seek out the rightful copyright owner or take the content down immediately.

So @ChopleyIOM I wonder would one of your videos, like the god of war one or the last of us, be affected? Would you be able to post the youtube link on CM or not? I think it might affect gaming videos, gonna be a headache for all concerned.

 

[mack341]

Done a bit of googling re video game content, and read the bbc's take on it:

Video gamers who share their gameplay on video-streaming services such as Twitch and YouTube highlight the complexity of copyright online.

"Multiple copyrights can exist in a single product," explained lawyer Kathy Berry, from Linklaters. "Video game studios own various copyrights in their games: the underlying code, the graphics, music, dialogue.

"When a gamer creates a video game video for YouTube, the video itself is a new copyright work owned by the gamer. However, as it also incorporates copyright works owned by the video game studios, the authorisation of both the gamer and the studio would be required to put it online."

"Studios tend not to enforce their rights against YouTube gamers in order to avoid the PR implications of being heavy-handed with fans, and because the videos can have significant promotional value," said Ms Berry.

Gamers may be able to argue that their videos are exempt from Article 13 because they have added their own commentary, criticism or review. But Ms Berry warned: "These defences have been largely untested in the courts in this context".

I suppose the same could be said for slot streamers but I doubt the slot firms would be bothered, however there will have to be some sort of copyright checking system in place on youtube. Then again it's money, if you add all the streamers videos together how much does youtube get from imbedded adverts maybe Netent, BTG etc will want their cut...

 

[ChopleyIOM]

So @ChopleyIOM I wonder would one of your videos, like the god of war one or the last of us, be affected? Would you be able to post the youtube link on CM or not? I think it might affect gaming videos, gonna be a headache for all concerned.

As I understand it reviews are covered by 'Fair Use', although as it stands now reviews get taken down by copyright claims. The film studio Lionsgate for examples are notorious for issuing copyright claims against negative reviews of their films on YouTube, even though the reviews should be protected by fair use, so it's not as if the current system is perfect.

The EU are insisting that Fair Use protections should be strengthened under the new directive, although how that will pan out in practice is potentially a different matter.

Where people are using copyrighted material for commercial ends, the water gets a lot muddier.

As I said mack, I genuinely don't know enough about this to really pass much of a comment. I would expect my God Of War video to be OK under the new rules as it's not commercial, it's a review/critical commentary piece, and should be permitted under fair use, if that actually turns out to be the case, I can't say.

 

[mack341]

As I understand it reviews are covered by 'Fair Use', although as it stands now reviews get taken down by copyright claims. The film studio Lionsgate for examples are notorious for issuing copyright claims against negative reviews of their films on YouTube, even though the reviews should be protected by fair use, so it's not as if the current system is perfect.

The EU are insisting that Fair Use protections should be strengthened under the new directive, although how that will pan out in practice is potentially a different matter.

Where people are using copyrighted material for commercial ends, the water gets a lot muddier.

As I said mack, I genuinely don't know enough about this to really pass much of a comment. I would expect my God Of War video to be OK under the new rules as it's not commercial, it's a review/critical commentary piece, and should be permitted under fair use, if that actually turns out to be the case, I can't say.

I think you're right, just clicked and started up those two review vids and there's no youtube advertising. I wonder though for the game reviewers who have a patreon link I can see it getting a bit more complicated.

For as long as we have the internet, youtube will likely carry on being a big part of it, and therefore attract a lot of advertising revenue, so this copyright law change is about the next 100 years. I read youtube made 13 billion in 2017, so obviously the film, music, gaming companies want their cut of this and I believe this law change forces youtube to get prior permission so it's likely a profit sharing deal will have to be made between youtube and the copyright holders otherwise youtube gets zilch and much less uploaded content.

Youtube is also owned by google, so maybe this part of the law change is a good thing, otherwise one company is gaining nearly all the advertising revenue from the whole web.

 

[paul7388]

Guess there will be a crackdown on many things now.

Just heard on news now that UK is first country to require all sites containing porn have to verify age of anyone viewing the site.

Now how that will get enforced i have no idea lol.

 

[pinnit2014]

Guess there will be a crackdown on many things now.

Just heard on news now that UK is first country to require all sites containing porn have to verify age of anyone viewing the site.

Now how that will get enforced i have no idea lol.

Heavy handedly?

 

[trancemonkey]

Yes good luck regulating millions of users' content. That'll be the day

The Chinese do it with 1.4bn people... so it's possible..

 

[goatwack]

The Chinese do it with 1.4bn people... so it's possible..

The Chinese certainly do it. That's why they have 1.4 billion people

 

[5ta]

There are two sides to this really aren't there ? Those who wish to abuse and those who don't. And that's on both sides of the argument, as far as ability goes.

Firstly, they cannot force creators to chase copyrights. If you don't want to get paid, it's easy to not do so. Issue a public license on any material you release. There is some misnomer belief that you need a lawyer or an official to hold, display or otherwise, your own copyright. What is yours, is rightfully yours.

Some forums for example have it written in their terms that very few people read, making for example my post right here "property of the forum owner". That in itself is in some places illegal and in any place, immoral. I can but won't, name forums that do this. Due respect to CM here, they might have it. I shake my head in dismay at the thought of giving people a place to display their content which then means the place then owns it.

Memes. Gifs. Stolen facebook posts. Public photography. Youtube is ripping so many people off. Many people are doing it. It doesn't matter morally what the law states, what the webmaster puts in small print. If it belongs to someone else, you should rightly have permission to use it, before you use it. Facebook flat out lied and gave Google access beyond privacy statements. Facebook had to be pressured into adding a copyright system but if you are not in the data sniffing database, good luck. Someone can photoshop you and go viral, making money and you can't do a thing other than try to sue and possibly fail even though you own (shock horror) you.

This is all nothing new. It also goes way beyond the top 5 websites. Someone has realised there is a massive industry to had in copyright on the superhighway. It is [curseword] colossal.

Billions have been made from stolen content. You think illegal movie sites and p2p filesharing is huge.

How thin is that line between freedom of press and plagiarism ? I can't see it.