For instance, the move could be a small boon to smaller startups who cannot afford the kind of content ID systems YouTube has. “My prediction would be that not implementing Article 17 would make the UK more attractive for running platform businesses,” says Reda. But this would likely be a small consideration about whether to do business outside the EU, in comparison to the other consequences of Brexit. The Copyright Directive officially took effect on June 7, 2019, and the Member States had until June 7, 2021, to establish laws supporting the directive.
This is done by translating the Directive and making sure that it’s compliant with other currently active laws. In fact, we’ve already seen how complicated this process can be, with Italian lawmakers mistranslating Article 17 before it went into action. Being a draft, Article 13 didn’t exclude any specific types of content from being marked as copyright infringement. Considering that memes and GIFs often use scenes from TV shows and movies, this type of user-generated content was seen as a potential victim. It refers to services that primarily exist to give the public access to « protected works or other protected subject-matter uploaded by its users », so it is likely to cover services such as YouTube, Dailymotion and Soundcloud.
- This would supposedly direct revenue away from tech giants and towards deserving artists.
- Outside the political sphere, some musicians also voiced support for the Directive, like James Blunt, who uploaded a video expressing why he advocates for Article 13.
- It’s not a secret that tech companies already have different kinds of filters to prevent certain kinds of content from appearing online.
- In addition, both memes and GIFs are marked safe for ‘purposes of quotation, criticism, review, caricature, parody, and pastiche’.
- Article 13 of the EU Copyright Directive states services such as YouTube could be held responsible if their users upload copyright-protected movies and music.
These are the countries that could challenge the copyright directive and possibly change the course of its implementation in the future. In a very informative blog post, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki shared her company’s views of the new law. The post starts by saying that YouTube has never been as popular as today, with the number of 1+ million subscriptions increasing 75%, year over year. At the same time, Wojcicki talks about the dangers of Article 13 (now known as Article 17) and how the company is under siege in the European Union. Video gamers who share their gameplay on video-streaming services such as Twitch and YouTube highlight the complexity of copyright online.
What was YouTube campaigning for?
Additionally make sure your User-Agent is not empty and is something unique and descriptive and try again. If you’re supplying an alternate User-Agent string,try changing back to default as that can sometimes result in a block. As noted earlier, Article 13 become Article 17 in the final form of the Directive, which went through a series of (minor) changes. In the final text, memes and GIFs were specifically mentioned as being excluded from the new law.
Was Article 13 Actually a Meme Ban?
If you think that we’ve incorrectly blocked you or you would like to discusseasier ways to get the data you want, please file a ticket here.
Italian Lawmakers Mistranslated ‘Article 17’ to Include Filtering of Legal Content
The final text renamed ‘Article 13’ to ‘Article 17’ and it has been passed by the European Parliament under its final name. The article intends to get news aggregator sites, such as Google News, to pay publishers for using snippets of their articles on their platforms. Press publications “may obtain fair and proportionate remuneration for the digital use of their press publications by information society service providers,” the Directive states. The Directive on Copyright would make online platforms and aggregator sites liable for copyright infringements, and supposedly direct more revenue from tech giants towards artists and journalists. If you continue reading, you’ll learn all there’s to know about Article 13 (or Article 17, as it’s called now).
“I can’t imagine YouTube packing up and saying, ‘well we’re not going to stream any content to France’,” says Erickson. Countries will simply have to implement stricter filters, and deal with potential court cases. “It creates more administrative red tape for them, but their services are still going to be available,” he says. Unless the Polish court case changes anything – and that’s a big if – individual member states will have two years to turn the new rules into their own national law.
No, Article 13, which became Article 17 in the final version of the directive, did not end up banning internet memes. The simplest (and the most effective) way to circumvent the new law is by using a VPN. These applications let you connect to a server located https://www.forexbox.info/calculated-bets/ in some other country, and therefore browse the Web like you’re physically located in that country. This means that if you use a VPN to connect to a server found in the USA, you will get to download and watch content not available in your country.
The public responses to the potential meme ban and other provisions of the Copyright Directive draft were far more negative than the reactions to the two data protection laws. https://www.forex-world.net/software-development/storage-security-specialist-jobs/ The proposed law will face a final vote in the European Parliament in the next few weeks. If it passes, it will be implemented by national governments over the next two years.
Here’s why the UK is (finally) dumping Article 13 for good
It certainly looks like she is not overreacting, given that YouTube could soon be forced to use pretty rigorous mechanisms that would stop a large percentage of content from appearing on the platform. It’s easy to see that we’re now entering the world of censorship, completely changing the way that the landscape of our digital realm. This is precisely why Article 17 has the potential to change the way that user-generated content is shared online. Even though the new EU Copyright Directive is quite broad, its main goal is to protect copyright owners in the digital realm. This means that from now on, major tech companies are held responsible for sharing copyrighted materials and they need to ensure that this doesn’t happen. It’s not a secret that tech companies already have different kinds of filters to prevent certain kinds of content from appearing online.
Interestingly enough, particular attention has been paid to the status of ‘Internet memes’ as an example of how copyrighted material is used and shared across the Web. Well, Article 13 was the one that stirred plenty of attention once being revealed publicly. Directly related to the filtering of copyrighted content and making big tech companies liable for hosting such content (even without their knowledge), it’s poised to have long-term consequences for everyone involved. However, ‘Article 13’ was a name for this specific subset of the EU Copyright Directive.
More likely however, explains Kretschmer, the UK civil service just kept their heads down during the copyright negotiations, unwilling to draw attention at a sensitive moment for the Withdrawal Agreement. Although the Article 13 vote has been passed by the European Parliament, this doesn’t mean its provisions take place 18 british pound sterling to danish krone straight away. The Directive on Copyright has gained vocal critics on both sides of the debate, but you can broadly chunk up defenders and detractors into two categories. On May 23, the Polish Prime Minister’s office announced it would bring a court case against Article 13 to the Court of Justice of the European Union.
