Continuation of the article „"
On March 26.03.2019, 11, members of the European Parliament voted for the adoption of laws to protect “Copyrights”. Articles 15 (as Article 13) and 17 (as Article 348) were adopted in full (274 in favour, 36 against, XNUMX abstaining). All attempts by opponents of the law to be discussed numerous amendments failed. Everything went much faster than planned. While opponents of the law talk about a dark day for the Internet, its supporters are celebrating victory.
Within two years from the date of adoption, the above articles must be integrated into the national legislation of the European Union countries.
And what about Russia?
Yesterday, 25.03.2019/XNUMX/XNUMX in one of the leading newspapers in Germany “" (FAZ) published an article "" The article authored by the editor of the “Law and Taxes” section, Mr. Hendrik Widuvilt, talks about the following:
The German Minister of Economics and Energy, Mr. Altmaier, entered into an agreement with his French counterpart that the scope of the copyright law will begin to apply to companies with an annual turnover of more than 3 million euros, and not from 20 million, as was planned by the German side . As a return favor, the French should not interfere with the construction of Nord Stream 2.
It should be noted that FAZ was extremely active in support of Article 13. And the author of the article is a former press secretary of the German Ministry of Justice.
Article 11 (Protection of press publications concerning online uses)
I believe that it is worth briefly mentioning Article 11, since its content concerns portals like Habr.
This article is more relevant to publishers, news agencies and other text content creators than to end users.
Google & Co use excerpts from other people's articles (snippets) in their news feed, consisting of a picture, title and the first few sentences. According to the authors of the bill, this information is sufficient for many users, and in no way encourages them to click on the link. Thus, Google users received the necessary information, in other words, they received the service without paying for it. Text content creators are recommended to begin negotiations with Google & Co in order to monetize the display of links, i.e., introduce a tax on links. It is curious that this law has existed in Germany since 2013. After the introduction of this law, German publishing houses themselves refused to use it, so when asked to discuss the conditions for implementing the law, Google responded by offering to remove links. This ended the discussion. The introduction of a similar law in Spain ended much more sadly. Here the discussion led to the removal of the news page from Spanish Google, after which the Spanish media were missing 10 to 15% of visitors.
The adopted Article 11 should not limit the posting of links by private users and non-profit organizations. True, the article does not describe the nuances of use. Is the link posted, for example on Twitter or Facebook, private or commercial? How different platforms will react to this law is anyone’s guess; perhaps someone will have to pay for posting other people’s links on their portal.
Terrorfilter
The imagination of European parliamentarians knows no bounds. Next up is Article 6, designed to combat terrorism on the Internet. And this time it’s not just about YouTube. But that is another story.
Source: habr.com