It’s The Real News Network, and I’m Greg Wilpert in Baltimore. Last week, the European Parliament approved a regulation that threatens to disrupt how the Internet works in Europe and, as a result, even throughout the world. The regulation is known as Article 11, and Article thirteen amends highbrow property rights to protect copyrighted substances on the Internet on platforms along with Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. As a result, these platforms might be held far more responsible for copyright infringements on their websites than was formerly the case.
Also, the legislation might limit the idea of “truthful use” and permit only very brief citations from information stories or tracks to be integrated into user-created content. The law nonetheless wishes to be authorized with the aid of the European Commission this coming October and is expected to bypass that point. National governments could then have two years to enforce it across Europe. Activists in Europe have released protests against the new rules. And right here’s a quick video, a parody, mocking the brand new law. [Soundbite.]
Such parody films would also be liable to censorship because they reference trademarked corporate symbols. Joining me now to discuss the implications of this new E.U. Copyright regulation is Julia Reda. She’s a member of the European Parliament for the Pirate Party in Germany, and they have been a vocal opponent of E.U. Copyright regulation. Thanks for becoming a member of us these days, Julia.
JULIA REDA: Hello.
GREG WILPERT: The language used to justify Articles 11 and 13 that legislate the new copyright protections is that of protective artists and small, impartial reporters who create content copied and utilized by others, but who would normally in no way get paid for it. Is this a real problem in Europe– paying those small producers of copyrighted, probably copyrighted, fabric? And if so, what is your concept of the way Conway taught creatively for their work?
JULIA REDA: It is actually troubling that creative humans’ common income is meager than other sectors. Unfortunately, this copyright reform isn’t always sincerely addressing the basic problems of this impact, but as an alternative is trying to resolve a big enterprise battle that has been happening among huge media organizations on the one hand and large generation companies on the other hand. So the proposal concerning the use of copyright-included content on online systems no longer, in reality, ensures that money ends up in the wallet of the real original creators. Still, it is attempting to position direct liability for copyright infringement on the net platform.
So if a person uploads something that is a copyright infringement, the platform somehow has to save you from that earlier than it even takes place. And the risk is this sort of pre-censorship of uploaded content. It is possible with additional filters that automatically try to locate such infringements and often delete the prison content material uploaded using creators themselves. So it can inadvertently hurt their potential to make a living and to reach their audiences online.
