On Fri 27 May 07:21, Hund wrote:
> On 26 May 2022 23:26:53 CEST, Rickard B Hansson <rickard.b.hansson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Hej!
> >
> >Jag funderar på nedanstående text från ett linuxforum:
> >
> >> under new EU regulations re. social media platforms including forums, you
> >> need basically staff and schedules or a 100% nonpublic forum. [...]
> >
> >
> >
> >> Consider the following: everybody wants to go on vacation. what happens
> >> with the forum? The only possible answer to that is: it gets shut down if
> >> there's nobody on schedule, because how else would you guarantee the
> >> presence of a volunteer mod? You can't, and that would already be a
> >> violation of the responsibilities that fall upon operators of forums...
> >>
> >
> >GDPR <https://gdpr.eu/what-is-gdpr/> och Digital Service Act
> ><https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/digital-services-act-package>
> >nämndes.
> >men jag kan inte hitta ovanstående scenario där.
> >Någom som vet? Är slutet för alla små nätforum nära nu, eller är
> >ovanstående en feltolkning?
> >
> >
> >// Med vänliga hälsningar rbh
> >
> >Rickard B Hansson
>
> Det låter befängt. Varför skulle ett forum behöva ha en ansvarig närvarande dygnet runt, när ingen annan hemsida behöver det?
Det är enkelt. Din hemsida eller Debians hemsida är inte är bara "read-only". Hela
världen kan inte skriva content på den. Men på ett öppen forum kan vem som helst
skapa ett konto och skriva ngt.
Men det har faktiskt ingenting att göra med EU-GDPR, men med "EU-Copyright directive".
Let me switch to english where i can articulate myself better :)
In 2019 the EC/parliament passed a new directive "on copyright and related rights in
the Digital Single Market". (link: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/790/oj)
The most relevant part is Article 17. I may quote
"An online content-sharing service provider shall therefore obtain an authorisation from the rightholders referred to in
Article 3(1) and (2) of Directive 2001/29/EC, for instance by concluding a licensing agreement, in order to communicate
to the public or make available to the public works or other subject matter."
"If no authorisation is granted, online content-sharing service providers shall be liable for unauthorised acts of
communication to the public, including making available to the public, of copyright-protected works and other subject
matter, unless the service providers demonstrate that they have:
(a) made best efforts to obtain an authorisation, and
(b) made, in accordance with high industry standards of professional diligence, best efforts to ensure the unavailability
of specific works and other subject matter for which the rightholders have provided the service providers with the
relevant and necessary information; and in any event
(c) acted expeditiously, upon receiving a sufficiently substantiated notice from the rightholders, to disable access to, or
to remove from their websites, the notified works or other subject matter, and made best efforts to prevent their
future uploads in accordance with point (b)."
This means that you need to obtain a licence for every copyright protected
text/image/video/whatever that is posted on your side. You need to negotiate the
licence *before* uploading the copyrighted material. If you cannot obtain a licence,
then you as the operator of the platform must ensure that no material whatsoever,
that violates valid copyright, is posted on your side. To do this you must have
automatic content detection ("content filters") and/or must have a procedure where
any arbitrary person may flag some content as copyright protected so that you can
remove this content in a timely manner, and prevent this content from being uploaded
again (hello again content filters).
This is basically impossible unless you are a very large company who can spend
millions on automated content filters and staff to review posts.
If you would strictly adhere to the regulation, each new post after the regulation
came into effect should have been hold for moderation and be manually checked for
copyright violations, as no automatic content filter can distinguish between fair use
policies for eg satire and actual violation of copyright. Furthermore, all posts
submitted to your website prior to the regulation becoming active should also be
reviewed, as you are also responsible for posts in the past.
Many experts have stated that the directive in this current form destroys all hobby
projects and means a deep cut into freedom of speech, as automated content filters
need to be set very strictly and thus there will be lots of false positives (fair use
policy for satire/art etc). On huge platforms, you cannot review all posts blocked
from the automatic content filter, so you rather block more and prohibit freedom of
speech, where there is no fine, then block less and risk fines for violating
copyright.
Sadly, the german politician and member of the EP Axel Voss, who was the driving
force behind the directive, did not care at all what the experts sad, and commented
on the huge protests and demonstrations we had in germany that "they are just some
teens who were fed some wrong narrative from big companies who dont want to be held
accountable".
Believe me, I am really not proud of our exports to the EP.
This directive was passed in 2019, and came into effect as national law 2 years
later, whereas each member of the EU had to draft their own law. So the actual
swedish implementation might be a little different from the implementation in other
EU contries, which is why i leave it as a task for the reader to look up their actual
binding version of this directive and figure out what is allowed and what it not in
their country :)
Med hälsningar från Tyskland
Simon