Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Mon 10 Dec 2018, 11:42
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
European Internet is under threat
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 2 [22 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Author Message
labbe5

Joined: 13 Nov 2013
Posts: 1519
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Wed 05 Sep 2018, 10:45    Post subject:  European Internet is under threat
Subject description: Here’s why you should care about European Copyright Reform
 

https://medium.com/freely-sharing-the-sum-of-all-knowledge/your-internet-is-under-threat-heres-why-you-should-care-about-european-copyright-reform-7eb6ff4cf321

Back in 2001, the European Parliament came together to pass regulations and set up copyright laws for the internet, a technology that was just finding its footing after the dot com boom and bust. Wikipedia had just been born, and there were 29 million websites. No one could imagine the future of this rapidly growing ecosystem — and today, the internet is even more complex. Over a billion websites, countless mobile apps, and billions of additional users. We are more interconnected than ever. We are more global than ever. But 17 years later, the laws that protect this content and its creators have not kept up with the exponential growth and evolution of the web.

The next wave of proposed rules under consideration by the European Parliament will either permit more innovation and growth, or stifle the vibrant free web that has allowed creativity, innovation, and collaboration to thrive. This is significant because copyright does not only affect books and music, it profoundly shapes how people communicate and create on the internet for years to come.

Further reading :
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/xwp87k/the-eu-could-vote-to-wreck-the-internet-tomorrow
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-copyright/eu-lawmakers-agree-common-stand-on-copyright-reforms-idUSKCN1LS1QR

Last edited by labbe5 on Wed 12 Sep 2018, 09:12; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 13147
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Wed 05 Sep 2018, 15:52    Post subject:  

Hello all.

This important subject should be fully discussed. Thanks to member labbe5
for bringing it to our attention.
~~~~~~~~~~~

Very fuzzy article. Beats around the bush a lot.

Very bizarre article, too. There is no mention of if the Members of European
Parliament (MEP's) have consulted anyone, their consituents, perhaps.
Maybe the EU had a poll about this? Because surely the MEP's are birdheads
who are voting on a whim? (NOT.) That's what comes across anyway
reading this supposedly serious article.

But nothing is said about the seriousness of the preliminary studies the
European Parliement conducted on this subject. Lacking a 360 degrees
view, this article, in my mind, it is just a piece of propaganda from
wikipedia.

Yeah. Propaganda from Wikipedia. Phew. Incredible, isn't it?

This excerpt :
Quote:
For example, consider the experience of a German professor who repeatedly
received copyright violation notices when using public domain music from
Beethoven, Bartók, and Schubert in videos on YouTube.
is plain stupid.

Bartok, Beethoven and Shubert have been dead over 50 years, hence their
works are in the public domain, according to international conventions on
copyright.

However the publisher always has some rights. (Even of the works of Plato,
for that matter.) If you are a pianist playing Sonata X by Beethoven in
concert, from the score published by music publisher Y, well, yes it is only
natural that you pay for your copy of the printed score.

But should the user / listener pay online to hear the music of say, Bartok's
"Miraculous Mandarin"? The answer is no, IMO. This is one of humanity's
greatest musical works, it has fallen now in public domain, and it should be
free to hear by anyone. (And view also, because it is a ballet.)

Aside from that... no I do not think that musicologist Z who validated the
manuscript of Beethoven's Sonata X should get paid royalties. This person is
usually already paid a salary from his/her university or institute to do that
type of job.

For poetry and literature, the same.

For paintings and photography, frankly I am not familiar with how (c) works
in practice in those cases. Maybe a professional painter should chip in with
his/her view.

Should the viewer pay to view on line, e.g., the last painting Picasso painted
before he died? Or should the person who makes it available for the viewer
to view pay a royalty to the Picasso Foundation? IMO, I think the latter.

Another example: Let's say I take a picture of the Horseshoe at Niagara
Falls, a world-reknowned natural phenomenon. Who has rights on the photo?
Samsung (or whatever camera company)? Me? The Canadian Government?
Mother Earth?

The article does NOT explain or give examples of how the European
Parliament's legistation would affect a "cloud of content" located, e.g., in
Montreal, Canada, or in Santiago, Chile, or in PnomPenh, Cambodge.

The article points to no solutions either. It just says, basically: "Don't touch
anything, we at wikipedia have a review board made of human eyes which
is working fine."

Perhaps wikipedia's system is working fine. That's internal info and nobody
can argue against that statement.

But who's complaining about the current state of things? Me as user? Or me
as composer, or Bash scripter, or more generally potential producer of
content?

Because we all are producer of contents in this day and age, however shy
we are and whether we like it or not
. Forums, agoras, web page
structures to reply to blogs, etc. are everywhere.

So... who's complaining? Us, the menial folk? Or is it "The Majors" from the
EU and the US who are complaining?

In my mind, the real question is:
Who is the EU legislation going to protect? The ordinary person? The artisan
writer? The budding artist? The big publishing or movie company? (This list
could go on and on.)

As a conclusion, I'll say that these copyright questions should NOT be
discussed in the individual Parliament or Congress of any country or
federation, they are too limitative and will only skew things in favor of the
industries/artists in that country or federation.

IMO, we need the UN and/or similar international organizations to put this
subject on their agenda and come up with internationally unbiased and
realistic proposals ASAP.
Ref.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_copyright_treaties

Have a great day, all, and happy thinking!

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
ITSMERSH


Joined: 02 May 2018
Posts: 562

PostPosted: Thu 06 Sep 2018, 20:31    Post subject:  

Quote:
For example, consider the experience of a German professor who repeatedly
received copyright violation notices when using public domain music from
Beethoven, Bartók, and Schubert in videos on YouTube.

I had once a copyright violence notice on a song of mine in a video of mine on Youtube (T.A.E.R.S.H. - The seventh wise man).

The claimed part was just some wind, rain and storm with thunders, that I combined from different sample waves (taken from a sound library of Sony Soundforge which I have a legal copy of and therefor I'm allowed to use any of the samples).

After I had protested this notice it took a day and it was gone...

Btw.: I love Europe, but I hate the EU - as so many of my friends and relatives...

_________________
RSH
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 13147
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Thu 06 Sep 2018, 21:48    Post subject:  

ITSMERSH wrote:
Quote:
For example, consider the experience of a German professor who repeatedly
received copyright violation notices when using public domain music from
Beethoven, Bartók, and Schubert in videos on YouTube.

I had once a copyright violence notice on a song of mine in a video of mine on Youtube (T.A.E.R.S.H. - The seventh wise man).

The claimed part was just some wind, rain and storm with thunders, that I combined from different sample waves (taken from a sound library of Sony Soundforge which I have a legal copy of and therefor I'm allowed to use any of the samples).

After I had protested this notice it took a day and it was gone...

Btw.: I love Europe, but I hate the EU - as so many of my friends and relatives...

RSH?

I am not an Anglophone -- maybe someone whose mother tongue is English
can confirm or contradict -- , but I think you mean "violation", not
"violence".

Violence is always physical, whereas violation is of a law or of a regulation,
or of some kind of property, but it is more abstract.

Coming back to your example, how do they know you did not put your
microphone out on your balcony on a stormy day and recorded that
storm?

I think your case is one where "Mother Earth" should get the royalties for
the sound effects. For sound effects of natural phenomena like these, I
don't think anyone can claim any copyright.

The sound engineer has to be paid a fair salary for his / her recording work
of course, but (s)he did not, and certainly no company, "composed" the
sound, say, of thunder, or the "split-splat" of heavy rain on the floor of the
balcony.

Now, if this person puts together some kind of sound collage with these
natural sounds, then that sound collage becomes a form of musical
composition and can have a copyright, but the individual elements, no (IMO).

(Maybe someone will not like this kind of music, but it can still be called
"music", and personal like or dislike is besides the point here.)

You mention youtube... Out of curiosity, was it youtube or an EU agency
that gave you the warning?

This is an old example (1966), but I don't think it is far-fatched:
Who gets the royalties from Steve Reich's "Come out"
Steve Reich, or the wounded Black demonstrator who said the original
sentence -- or even the news network who made this victim known?

(Note to listeners who are not used to this kind of music: it starts getting
"musical" past about the 3rd minute, IMO.)

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
rufwoof

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Posts: 2706

PostPosted: Thu 06 Sep 2018, 21:56    Post subject:  

Just yet another EU regulation that strives to stamp a apparent level of authority. Read through many EU rules and more often they're full of holes and inconsistencies. PRIIP for instance that effectively requires EU stamps everywhere (the authority rules are a dog chasing its tail - can't recall the exact detail but along the lines of to be accredited you need 10 years experience, but can't get approved experience without accreditation). Cookies are another, pop ups on many sites. Unfortunately 28 conflicts of interests in setting rules leads to a dogs dinner.

The EU has to merge into a single (predominately German led) entity in order to survive. That transition is more likely to lead to lock in (stifle) than promote development/outreach. Germany was massively bailed out after the 2009 crisis. Much of its over stretched bad debts were transferred onto the ECB's books - that all EU member states have a share of. Germany is locking others in via debt, in effect gifting goods (cars etc.) to the others for a additional figure added to that states liabilities. Printing/spending over 2 trillion Euro's (devaluing all other Euro's in circulation) in a attempt to export there problems was not permitted to succeed. Leaving the only option of having to transition to a single entity. As part of that EU members can anticipate increased lock in with time. The UK was about the only one capable of escape and should anticipate massive reduction of what trade it does with the EU post Brexit. Such de-risking of over exposed UK reliance upon EU trade activity will serve the UK well mid to longer term. A concern is that is could all lead to yet another German initiated European war as ultimately the current structure that facilitates large German surplus will sooner or later have to be shared out with the others - something that German voters most likely will strongly oppose.

The EU is predominately about self preservation, more of a political agenda than a economic agenda. If the UK redirects existing EU trade to be with the US instead then UK/US trade will be more equally balanced both ways (which Trump would welcome). Whilst the UK would like to keep a finger in EU trade activities, the EU will look to block that (protectionism/lock in). The UK however is the EU's largest single country export market. The UK's combined 4 countries population compares to the combined population of 15 EU member states. For geographical and historic reasons the UK is the mid timezone predominant financial trading hub and that will continue, as anyone who diverges from that endures light speed communication delay times that in the modern age is no different to being able to out run the flags that communicated prices ahead of the crowd and make a killing in the process. The UK trades more US $ each day than are traded in the USA (a consequence of being in the mid global timezone as trading transitions from Tokyo to London to New York).

The primary problem of the EU Internet Threat is not to the 94% rest of the world, but to the 6% of global population contained within the EU. Outside of that - meh! Losing the UK sees the EU decline down to be barely representative of half of Europe. Whilst that body might strive to stamp its authority increasingly others will simply cut-off and stifle such political policies. The EU is one of the worlds slowest growing economies, is in relative decline. Fining/blocking US companies or imposing additional rules are just additional steps down the wrong road that leads to having to print and print money until all private owned assets have been purchased by the single entity EU wide 'state'. As Putin say's the EU is like the former USSR - but worse.

_________________
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) :wq
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 13147
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Thu 06 Sep 2018, 22:02    Post subject:  

@*RSH:
I just listened to your piece. So Einstein is thinking of Trump and Trump is
thinking of Einstein, eh? (Yeah, sure!!!) Twisted Evil

But i see what you mean in your previous post: the wind effects, etc., at the
end of your piece.

I think I did not understand much of your piece, but visually and sound-wise,
I found it interesting. Good continuation. BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)

Last edited by musher0 on Thu 06 Sep 2018, 22:36; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 13147
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Thu 06 Sep 2018, 22:30    Post subject:  

@rufwoof

Save your saliva for your next meal?! Wink

As I said at the end of my first reply, this new copyright problem is global.

The EU, or the US, or any country or federation can split hairs about this or
that detail, and try to control it. And we the public can say Regulation A
from the EU is stupid, and regulation B from the US is the pits, and Canada's
update of its Copyright Act is not worth the paper it's written on...

Lots of factors are new. At the time the International Copyright Treaties
were signed -- url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_copyright_treaties[/url]

-- artistically, there were no picture or sound collages; no "installations"
either (as a form of art)

-- no forums like this one -- where all conributors can be considered authors

-- no Internet (and no privacy concerns, not as we know them now).

-- no automatic translation

-- etc., etc. (...partial list... )

This new problem will not go away and it needs a global response --
from the UN or a similar world-wide organization.

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
rufwoof

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Posts: 2706

PostPosted: Fri 07 Sep 2018, 05:07    Post subject:  

The UN requires global agreement by all. Rare due to conflicts of interests. Globalisation has peaked, robotics and continued population expansion depict lock-down. Paramount to the open internet transforming to state controlled regional networks where network rules differ between regions. The EU is even striving to secure that their regional network doesn't use US based hardware/software but their own versions instead.
_________________
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) :wq
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 13147
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Fri 07 Sep 2018, 06:53    Post subject:  

Hi rufwoof.

In FIFO fashion:
rufwoof wrote:
The UN requires global agreement by all. Rare due to conflicts of interests. Globalisation has peaked, ...
True. However, copyright conventions have been successfully
negociated before. So it is not impossible, IMO, if every country
recognizes the problem and displays some goodwill.
rufwoof wrote:
...robotics and continued population expansion depict lock-down.
Jo no comprendo this use of the word "lock-down".
rufwoof wrote:
Paramount to the open internet...
Yes, the Internet should remain open. But what is the link with the rest of
your sentence? I'm not following you here.
rufwoof wrote:
...transforming to state controlled regional networks where network rules
differ between regions. The EU is even striving to secure that their regional
network doesn't use US based hardware/software but their own versions
instead.
Well, they can do it if they want, but some company will eventually provide
converters. Like we did for French/European TV signals converted to
Canadian TV signals.

I could understand if the EU wanted to make more difficult the "invasion"
(note the quotes; I am not saying this is necessarily so) of American or
other (Russian?) culture. A form of "cultural exception", like Canada has
in the NAFTA.

But even so, what does hardware specialization have to do with the search
for new copyright laws adapted to this "global internet"?

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
labbe5

Joined: 13 Nov 2013
Posts: 1519
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Wed 12 Sep 2018, 09:57    Post subject: EU Parliament Adopts Controversial Upload Filter Proposal
Subject description: a severe blow to the free and open internet
 

https://torrentfreak.com/eu-parliament-adopts-controversial-upload-filter-proposal-180912/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Torrentfreak+%28Torrentfreak%29

“Today’s decision is a severe blow to the free and open internet. By endorsing new legal and technical limits on what we can post and share online, the European Parliament is putting corporate profits over freedom of speech and abandoning long-standing principles that made the internet what it is today,” Reda adds in a separate statement.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
watchdog

Joined: 28 Sep 2012
Posts: 1690
Location: Italy

PostPosted: Wed 12 Sep 2018, 11:12    Post subject:  

I pay 52,00 € monthly for flat fiber. Is it worthwhile if the internet is going to be not the same as I know? I'll consider to renounce to the fiber.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
ITSMERSH


Joined: 02 May 2018
Posts: 562

PostPosted: Wed 12 Sep 2018, 11:48    Post subject:  

@musher0

Quote:
I am not an Anglophone -- maybe someone whose mother tongue is English can confirm or contradict -- , but I think you mean "violation", not
"violence".

I'm not an Anglophone as well. So, yes I meant violation. Thanks.

Quote:
You mention youtube... Out of curiosity, was it youtube or an EU agency
that gave you the warning?

Youtube. It popped up, when I was logging in the next time after publishing the video.

_________________
RSH
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 13147
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Wed 12 Sep 2018, 11:54    Post subject:  

Hi, people.

-- Concerning labbe5's update earlier today --

Euh... "It's not over til it's over!"

Please see the last paragraph of that blurb:
Quote:
If the Copyright Directive is eventually adopted, individual Member States
will have to implement it into local law, which is another hurdle that has to
be passed.

That vote is expected early next year, with potentially some more amend-
ments presented until then during the "trilogue" discussions (in EU lingo).

I personally fail to see what is so wrong with an author getting paid for his
work. Sure, there is going to be an additional technical and legal layer.

This is entirely different from holding a copyright on say a computer app
and then modulating it with GPL3.

Anyway, as the GPL3 is now, I doubt it is offering much protection to
developers, there is so much pillage of code lines... Also GPL3 is a contract
under US law, not European law, although recognized by some European
countries (e.g. France), but not Canada, AFAIK.

My 2 ¢.

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
watchdog

Joined: 28 Sep 2012
Posts: 1690
Location: Italy

PostPosted: Wed 12 Sep 2018, 12:47    Post subject:  

musher0 wrote:

I personally fail to see what is so wrong with an author getting paid for his
work. Sure, there is going to be an additional technical and legal layer.


I would agree but I see that directive as a first step for censorship. User generated contents will be filtered for copyright rules: who owns the filter? How will it be used? Secondarily copyright rules are often a trick to get paid forever doing nothing: you have to work day by day if you want to be paid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
ITSMERSH


Joined: 02 May 2018
Posts: 562

PostPosted: Wed 12 Sep 2018, 14:29    Post subject:  

I'm pro-copyright and I'm pro-copyleft. Each for its own.

Quote:
you have to work day by day if you want to be paid.

This is what almost all musicians are doing. They're working on their instruments day by day - but: without getting paid (exception would be musicians of an orchestra who get paid also for the rehearsals). Even famous musicians are doing so. It's similar with the writers of books (don't know the right term for Schriftsteller Laughing ) etc.

So, one gets paid for that work when playing a show (which is work also) or after publishing music when selling albums or downloads or what ever is up to date on that front. To me it's just and simply a crime to make copies of others copyrighted music/movies/software and to give it away to friends or to place it on the web for downloads.

Said this multiple times already...

_________________
RSH
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 2 [22 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0868s ][ Queries: 11 (0.0061s) ][ GZIP on ]