Google can continue to use

Strasbourg

The download filters were the European MEPs so not afraid. With a clear majority (318 to 278), parliamentarians arrested Thursday digital copyright projects in Strasbourg. Google, Youtube and Co. can first continue to use text, images and videos – without having to pay for it.

download filters. It is a software that badyzes the content downloaded by the user, such as text, images or videos for productions protected by copyright. The now-defeated bill should ensure that major online platforms such as Youtube acquire licenses in this case. Because the rights belong to authors, journalists, artists as well as publishers.

On the one hand critics see the danger of censorship in the net because the filters also hate the content could stop. Secondly, it is argued that there is a risk that small start-ups may not be able to afford expensive software and therefore prefer to close operations rather than risk a fine. In addition, they fear that even a simple link may be protected by copyright because it contains, for example, the title of a text written by an author.

? clear: There will be no tax on the links because the cross-reference license is called. Even more: private users should continue to build links and texts and images could be shared without having to pay for it. The main difference with major platforms such as Google, Youtube or Facebook is that they exploit the beginnings of text, images and video clips and thus create a lucrative environment for their advertising revenue.

Google and other platforms seize the intellectual property of journalists, authors and artists that publishers have acquired to sell you. The platforms therefore generate significant revenue because they use this content as an attractive environment for their advertising, but without paying for their own costs. In the long run, this will lead to the disappearance of quality journalism because their creators and publishers can no longer live there.

They lobbied EU parliamentarians with an unprecedented wave of lobbying and fears of the end of free movement. Internet powered. And they have spread the risk of a network in which censorship is virtually automated. According to the rapporteur of the House of Representatives, Axel Voss (CDU), even the children of parliamentarians were invited to influence them.

Green politician Helga Trüpel, who has been working on the subject for many years, has made this very clear. She badyzed the fact that the Internet promotes a concept of freedom that grants unlimited freedom to large corporations, but diminishes its accountability to journalists, artists, writers and publishers. "It's fair compensation, not censorship," she says. Incidentally, if the content was properly licensed, the filters would be superfluous. That's where the EU comes from.

After the rejection of the plenary, the Legal Affairs Committee must consult again. What comes out is open. However, one can think that the download filter must be inclined. In September, Parliament could then decide on an amended proposal. If a majority is in agreement, the last talks with the Member States can begin – and could be completed by the end of the year. However, if the plenary completely rejects the revised text within two months, the copyright reform would have failed.