General Category > Blog

Article 11 of the EU Copyright Directive (link tax)

(1/3) > >>

kat:

ratty redemption:
thanks for interpreting that for us kat.

kat:
Aye... the language is far too open so what they're doing is allowing rights holder a de facto carte blanc over the criteria that establishes what's okay or not... this even make the likes of Google, Facebook et al subject to outside authority. That's a factual interpretation of what's being presented, not a hyperbolic interpretation or conspiracy. As for the consequences, what that might mean and how it'll be enacted, is anyone's guess at this point, it may very well be down to people being taken to court to establish exactly where the lines are to be drawn.

With that said an interesting and mildly conspiratorial aspect of this is the deafening silence from the same parties who clamored and climbed all over the Net Neutrality, SOPA, CISPA, TPP, PIPA, ACTA, CPBR etc. debates. This new EU Directive, whilst seemingly relating specifically to copyright, does exactly the same thing, requires service providers (Google, Facebook etal) police their networks - different reasons, same outcome.

ratty redemption:
understood and agreed.

kat:
There is some debate over links ("hyperlinks") being subject to the Directive in some quarters where paragraph (33) is quoted as rationale;

--- Quote --- ... This protection does not extend to acts of hyperlinking which do not constitute communication to the public.
--- End quote ---
And paragraph (34);

--- Quote --- ...the rights granted to the publishers of press publications… should also be subject to the same provisions and limitations … including the exception on quotation for the purposes such as criticism or review.
--- End quote ---
Unfortunately these bits of text are from the Directives preamble not Article defined clauses, so have little (if anything) effect beyond laying out context - the presence of this type of preamble does not preclude the item of discussion from being subject to the Directive because the clauses themselves do not make that distinction.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page