[ad_1]
All pages of Wikipedia are obscured as a sign of protest. In their place, we read a message that in turn refers to an appeal against a new set of copyright rules that the European Union is working on that will be challenged on July 5th. The new rules could radically change the way we use the Internet and, according to the most pessimistic critics, could lead to unprecedented control of online content.
On 20 June, the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) approved the proposals contained in the new European Copyright Directive, which is necessary to introduce certain updates of the copyright protection rules. ;author. The problem is that the directive contains two articles – 11 and 13, also mentioned in the Wikipedia message – that many observers could have dangerous consequences for the free flow of information online.
Article 13 says that content downloaded online in the European Union must be checked in advance, in order to prevent files containing copyrighted material from being copyrighted. Author find themselves online. The system should work more or less like YouTube's Content ID, the automatic video recognition feature, which checks to see if any copyright-protected and unregistered content has been downloaded, so that it can be removed immediately from the site or to display them only with advertising, revenue sharing with the current owners of the copyright. Content ID is a very refined system on which YouTube has worked a lot, but most experts share the same point of view: it is impossible to imagine a similar mechanism for any online download made in the European Union. .
Critics also point out that Article 13 would indeed impose a preventive control of content posted online, creating a real filter against the principles of openness and free flow of information on the Internet . Article 13 itself is extremely vague and does not indicate the possible technical solutions to achieve such an ambitious goal, nor does it specify precisely the responsibilities and rules of # 39; s application.
Article 11 provides instead for the establishment of some sort of fees for links "to be paid to large online platforms such as Google and Facebook to link news sites." Practically, Google and others should agree to a license with each publisher, paying an annual fee that covers their reporting activity and links to articles. </ p> <p> The idea derives from the comparison that has been going on for years. between publishers and major online platforms: the former accuses Google and others to show their content through previews on news aggregators or social networks, without permission and without reward in return, they say that most of the traffic to the news sites comes from publishing previews and other items in the aggregators, but in recent years Google has Many initiatives to fund information site projects, to alleviate the problem and avoid more exaggerated demands from online newspapers.
From Wikipedia:
Dear Reader, Dear Reader
On July 5, 2018, the European Parliament will decide whether to speed up the approval of the Right to Know Directive. # 39; author. This directive, if promulgated, will considerably limit the freedom of the Internet.
Rather than updating copyright laws in Europe to promote the participation of all in the information society, it threatens online freedom and creates barriers. to the Net by imposing new barriers, filters and restrictions. If the proposal is approved, it may be impossible to share a newspaper article on social networks or find it on a search engine. Wikipedia itself could close.
The proposal has already met the strong disapproval of more than 70 computer scientists, including website creator Tim Berners-Lee (here), 169 academics (here), 145 organizations working in the fields of human rights 39, man, freedom of the press, scientific research and the computer industry (here) and the Wikimedia Foundation (here)
For these reasons, the Italian Wikipedia community has decided to conceal all pages of the encyclopedia. We want to continue to offer a free, open and collaborative encyclopedia with verifiable content. We therefore ask all members of the European Parliament to reject the current text of the directive and to reopen the debate by examining the numerous proposals of Wikimedia badociations, starting with the abolition of the articles. 11 and 13, as well as the extension of panorama freedom to the whole of the EU and the protection of the public domain.
[ad_2]
Source link
