The new european copyright directive is setting all the Internet forums ablaze. Users, accustomed to the freedom of expression endemic to this environment, have taken a stand against this proposal. So far they have won the first battle, since on July 5 the draft was voted on in the European Parliament and the result was 278 votes in favor and 318 votes against.
Although this first draft has been rejected, the European Parliament will have to amend it. Therefore, it is possible that in the future a revision of this directive will eventually go ahead. In the course of this article, we will analyze the potential effects of this measure if it is accepted.
At Zemsania, as specialists in IT recruitment and digitization, we help you find the best tech talent on the web.
The copyright directive, known as Link Tax, has two particularly controversial articles: 11 and 13. These two sections could force content providers and platform owners to censor all content that may infringe copyright even before it is published, all without judicial intervention. All users should be made aware of the effects of this directive before September when the next vote takes place.
Consequences of the new Copyright Directive in Europe
The Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright in the digital single market establishes a series of regulations that may harm the right to freedom of expression on the Internet and change the way we understand this service in Europe.
Article 11
Article 11 of the document provides for the Protection of press publications with regard to digital uses. This article grants publishers of press content certain rights that clash with Internet freedom. The most controversial is the right to to authorize or prohibit in any way the reproduction of:
- Works by authors
- Fixations of performances of artists, performers or executants
- Producers' phonograms
- Originals and copies of producers' films
- Broadcasting organizations' broadcasting fixation
Another factor that has made users nervous is that authors have almost absolute control over their creation. This should not necessarily be negative a priori, but it conflicts with the open logic of the Internet. In this sense, the authors shall have the exclusive right to authorize or prohibit any public communication of their works.
Since this is a European regulation, each member country will be able to adapt the copyright on this type of content. To link to a news website, we will have to comply with the law of our country in reference to this matter or we will be forced to obtain a license. In addition, press publishers would have exclusive rights over the indexing of their content. They would be the only ones able to give the green light or to prohibit this treatment of the content. To make matters worse, this right would remain in force for 20 years.
Article 13
Article 13 talks about the Use of protected content by information society service providers that store and provide access to large quantities of works and other services uploaded by their users..
The text deals with providers of large quantities of works and platforms where the user can upload content. The first section of the article states that providers must cooperate with the rights holders of the original product to avoid violating agreements. Thus, in the worst case, they could make these works unavailable on such services.
Platforms that allow users to publish all types of content would have to monitor all these files. These files include text, sound, code, still and moving images and other works. Despite all this, providers would have to provide users with complaint and recourse mechanisms.
Basically, this article would support a automated censorship that would leave judges and administrators out of the loop. In this way, human judgment in analyzing what content infringes copyright would be displaced.
Freedom of expression on the web
Many users believe that the implementation of this copyright directive could have serious consequences on freedom of expression on the web. In fact, sites such as Wikipedia temporarily closed their doors in protest.
Those who benefit most in this case are the copyright owners. However, the question arises as to what is the most logical attitude in the Internet world. Works are distributed over the network both licitly and illicitly, but piracy can help to raise awareness of certain products. In fact, it is practically impossible to try to regulate this phenomenon.
The Internet has always been the realm of absolute freedom, where users share content of all kinds on a daily basis. Although not all content on the Internet is of high quality, it is the most powerful and democratic method of cultural dissemination that exists. Phenomena such as viralization would not make sense without this open philosophy. For all these reasons, it is worth asking what should be prioritized: freedom of expression on the web or control of content.