[News] Would NSC be at risk from EU s proposed copyright laws?

looney · Jun 1, 2018

Was watching a utube yesterday about it, needing licensing instead of fair usage as well as other restrictive orwellian practices, imo we cant get out the EU quick enough.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...moves-monitor-uploads-censor-memes-tax-links/

have drafted legislation which detractors say could force online platforms to monitor and control all uploads to some platforms with “content recognition technologies”. They are also said to have proposed what has been termed a ‘link tax’, which could compel blogs and other websites to pay just to reference content.

So will NSC need a license to mock palaces BBS?

beorhthelm · Jun 1, 2018

bit bewildering how this has even come about as there is no angle in which its for the good of the citizens, purely for business interests. and outright contradicts existing law on fair use.

looney · Jun 1, 2018

beorhthelm said:
bit bewildering how this has even come about as there is no angle in which its for the good of the citizens, purely for business interests. and outright contradicts existing law on fair use.

I agree, the EU is in cahoots with big business and this looks like an attempt to snuff out alternative media. It wont work, most utubers have diversified across various sites like patreon and outside of the eUs grasp. It may hit just the wrong targets like NSC and other platforms.

knocky1 · Jun 1, 2018

NSC should be OK as long as the mods realise what the free speech agendas are from EDL, Britain First and Popular British.

Hmm.........You're right there is a massive risk!

ManOfSussex · Jun 1, 2018

looney · Jun 1, 2018

knocky1 said:
NSC should be OK as long as the mods realise what the free speech agendas are from EDL, Britain First and Popular British.

Hmm.........You're right there is a massive risk!

Eh? Dont have a clue what your on about here.

brightn'ove · Jun 2, 2018

Julia Reda, a German Pirate Party MEP, has written that “these proposals are pandering to the demands of some news publishers to charge search engines and social networks for sending traffic their way, as well as the music industry’s wish to be propped up in its negotiations with YouTube.

This doesn’t make any sense at all. News publishers want to charge search engines for sending them traffic? Lmfao get real, this person doesn’t have a clue what they are talking about and this website has listed them as an actual source :lolol:

A Breitbart story with dodgy sources and a deliberate misunderstanding of a piece of legislation - how strange.

knocky1 · Jun 2, 2018

looney said:
Eh? Dont have a clue what your on about here.

Nor me this morning.

Grombleton · Jun 2, 2018

brightn'ove said:
A Breitbart story with dodgy sources and a deliberate misunderstanding of a piece of legislation - how strange.

I was going to say - i saw it was a Breitbart link and immediately realised it was likely to be bollocks.

Harry Wilson's tackle · Jun 2, 2018

I have blocked the OP but gather from replies he's started a thread from a Brietbart link. Shouldn't this be an automatic three week ban? For being a boring old ****, if nothing else.

Theatre of Trees · Jun 2, 2018

There are issues, particularly articles 11 and 13. See https://creativecommons.org/tag/eu-copyright-reform/ for a better balanced view.

Deleted member 22389 · Jun 2, 2018

Harry Wilson's tackle said:
I have blocked the OP but gather from replies he's started a thread from a Brietbart link. Shouldn't this be an automatic three week ban? For being a boring old ****, if nothing else.

Have you really blocked him?

Medwayseagull · Jun 2, 2018

bashlsdir said:
Have you really blocked him?

I would have thought anyone with any sense would.

The Clamp · Jun 2, 2018

Another typical load of half understood, poorly sourced, badly presented, patently untrue bollosks from the rabid OP.

dingodan · Jun 2, 2018

The Clamp said:
Another typical load of half understood, poorly sourced, badly presented, patently untrue bollosks from the rabid OP.

Thank goodness we have people like you, who fully understand the well sourced, well presented, patently true truth.

Praise be.

Hey, why do you have a picture of someone injured from a plane crash as your profile picture? Are you some kind of wrong'un?

dingodan · Jun 2, 2018

brightn'ove said:
This doesn’t make any sense at all. News publishers want to charge search engines for sending them traffic? Lmfao get real, this person doesn’t have a clue what they are talking about and this website has listed them as an actual source

A Breitbart story with dodgy sources and a deliberate misunderstanding of a piece of legislation - how strange.

Yes it sounds really stupid. But you should check if it's true before talking like a smart-ass.

Here is a summary, because for some reason all the smartest people on this board like you don't seem to actually read anything:

- The latest proposal from the head of the copyright committee would deny creators the right to refuse remuneration — the right to share a work without getting paid — which could undermine the use of CC licenses if approved.
- Press publishers will receive—whether they like it or not—an “inalienable right to obtain an [sic] fair and proportionate remuneration for such uses.” This means that publishers will be required to demand payment from news aggregators.
- An unwaivable right to compensation would interfere with the operation of open licensing by reserving a special and separate economic right above and beyond the intention of some publishers.
- Forcing publishers who use CC to accept additional inalienable rights to be remunerated violates the letter and spirit of Creative Commons licensing and denies publishers the freedom to conduct business and share content as they wish. The proposal would pose an existential threat to the over 1.3 billion CC-licensed works online, shared freely by hundreds of millions of creators from around the world.

https://creativecommons.org/2018/03/29/head-copyright-committee-wants-deny-eu-creators-right-share/

The Clamp · Jun 2, 2018

dingodan said:
Thank goodness we have people like you, who fully understand the well sourced, well presented, patently true truth.

Praise be.

Hey, why do you have a picture of someone injured from a plane crash as your profile picture? Are you some kind of wrong'un?

That's racism's Nigel Farage. My signature, "nearly" refers to him nearly dying and how close we were to getting rid of the ****.

dingodan · Jun 2, 2018

The Clamp said:
That's racism's Nigel Garage. My signature, "nearly" refers to him nearly dying and how close we were to getting rid of the ****.

So that's a "yes" then.

You're quite a sick person for someone so high and mighty and self righteous.

The Clamp · Jun 2, 2018

dingodan said:
So that's a "yes" then.

You're quite a sick person for someone so high and mighty and self righteous.

Oh dear. What a pity. Never mind.

beorhthelm · Jun 2, 2018

brightn'ove said:
This doesn’t make any sense at all. News publishers want to charge search engines for sending them traffic? Lmfao get real, this person doesn’t have a clue what they are talking about and this website has listed them as an actual source

A Breitbart story with dodgy sources and a deliberate misunderstanding of a piece of legislation - how strange.

ignore the source, its a pretty important wide reaching impact. see your avatar? that would need to be licenced that from BHA and Mr Ronaldo Esq., Bozza would have to pay licencing for you publishing it on the website.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[News] Would NSC be at risk from EU s proposed copyright laws?

Banned

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Banned

Well-known member

We wunt be druv

Banned

cringe

Well-known member

Surrounded by <div>s

Harry Wilson's Tackle

Well-known member

Deleted member 22389

Guest

JCB

Well-known member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Share this page