0 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:30,000 Dear viewer, these subtitles were generated by a machine via the service Trint and therefore are (very) buggy. If you are capable, please help us to create good quality subtitles: https://c3subtitles.de/talk/686 Thanks! 1 00:00:13,110 --> 00:00:15,329 Today, we start with Julia 2 00:00:15,330 --> 00:00:17,429 Reed. She's the member of the European 3 00:00:17,430 --> 00:00:19,619 Parliament for European Pirate 4 00:00:19,620 --> 00:00:21,689 Party and vice chair of the 5 00:00:21,690 --> 00:00:24,929 Greens EFA group and 6 00:00:24,930 --> 00:00:27,149 her first talk at thirty one 7 00:00:27,150 --> 00:00:28,469 C three. 8 00:00:28,470 --> 00:00:30,149 She talked about Kopi wrongs. 9 00:00:30,150 --> 00:00:32,309 And now we go one step 10 00:00:32,310 --> 00:00:35,609 further to copy Wrongs 2.0, 11 00:00:35,610 --> 00:00:37,829 the status yours and give a warm round 12 00:00:37,830 --> 00:00:39,780 of applause, please, for Eugena. 13 00:00:47,530 --> 00:00:49,929 Hello, everybody, I was here two years 14 00:00:49,930 --> 00:00:51,849 ago for a thirty one see free. 15 00:00:51,850 --> 00:00:54,309 And back then I was a freshly elected 16 00:00:54,310 --> 00:00:56,049 member of the European Parliament. 17 00:00:56,050 --> 00:00:58,539 And I was quite optimistic that finally 18 00:00:58,540 --> 00:01:00,759 the time had come for a meaningful 19 00:01:00,760 --> 00:01:02,289 copyright reform in Europe. 20 00:01:02,290 --> 00:01:04,749 And actually things were going OK 21 00:01:04,750 --> 00:01:06,489 for about a year. 22 00:01:06,490 --> 00:01:08,409 The parliament actually proposed some 23 00:01:08,410 --> 00:01:10,509 improvements to copyright law based on 24 00:01:10,510 --> 00:01:11,799 my initiatives. 25 00:01:11,800 --> 00:01:14,079 And then nothing really happened 26 00:01:14,080 --> 00:01:16,479 for about a year until 27 00:01:16,480 --> 00:01:18,819 everybody's favorite year came around 28 00:01:18,820 --> 00:01:20,140 2016. 29 00:01:21,580 --> 00:01:24,129 If you think that 2016 30 00:01:24,130 --> 00:01:26,229 was a terrible year, ask a 31 00:01:26,230 --> 00:01:28,029 copyright activist. 32 00:01:28,030 --> 00:01:30,189 Within one week in September 33 00:01:30,190 --> 00:01:32,239 to pretty dramatic things happened. 34 00:01:32,240 --> 00:01:34,779 First, the European Commission released 35 00:01:34,780 --> 00:01:37,299 its proposal for the long awaited reform 36 00:01:37,300 --> 00:01:38,619 of copyright law. 37 00:01:38,620 --> 00:01:40,599 And you're going to hear me rant about it 38 00:01:40,600 --> 00:01:41,679 for the next hour or so. 39 00:01:41,680 --> 00:01:43,959 That gives you an idea of about 40 00:01:43,960 --> 00:01:45,609 how bad it was. 41 00:01:45,610 --> 00:01:47,409 And the other thing that happened during 42 00:01:47,410 --> 00:01:49,659 that week was that the European Court 43 00:01:49,660 --> 00:01:51,879 of Justice made a ruling where 44 00:01:51,880 --> 00:01:54,519 it decided that hyperlinks can constitute 45 00:01:54,520 --> 00:01:56,079 a copyright infringement. 46 00:01:56,080 --> 00:01:58,239 So you would think that a person who 47 00:01:58,240 --> 00:02:00,309 is thinking is not 48 00:02:00,310 --> 00:02:02,199 the one who is actually putting the stuff 49 00:02:02,200 --> 00:02:04,389 online so they shouldn't be liable 50 00:02:04,390 --> 00:02:05,949 for copyright infringement. 51 00:02:05,950 --> 00:02:08,079 However, the European Court of Justice 52 00:02:08,080 --> 00:02:10,149 asked itself, well, what if the 53 00:02:10,150 --> 00:02:12,159 person who is linking to that content 54 00:02:12,160 --> 00:02:14,019 actually knows that their content is 55 00:02:14,020 --> 00:02:15,020 illegal? 56 00:02:16,060 --> 00:02:17,859 They think in this case there should be a 57 00:02:17,860 --> 00:02:18,909 copyright infringement. 58 00:02:18,910 --> 00:02:21,219 So they decided that this is the case 59 00:02:21,220 --> 00:02:23,379 now. And then they decided that if 60 00:02:23,380 --> 00:02:25,659 this link is made with a profit motive, 61 00:02:25,660 --> 00:02:27,699 somebody is trying to make money, then 62 00:02:27,700 --> 00:02:29,799 you can pretty much assume that they know 63 00:02:29,800 --> 00:02:32,049 that whatever they are linking to is 64 00:02:32,050 --> 00:02:33,399 a copyright infringement. 65 00:02:33,400 --> 00:02:35,349 And they actually have to prove that they 66 00:02:35,350 --> 00:02:37,029 didn't know, which is quite a difficult 67 00:02:37,030 --> 00:02:37,989 thing to do. 68 00:02:37,990 --> 00:02:40,059 So in this particular case, it 69 00:02:40,060 --> 00:02:42,699 was about a right wing populist 70 00:02:42,700 --> 00:02:44,769 website that was for profit 71 00:02:44,770 --> 00:02:47,229 that was linking to unreleased Playboy 72 00:02:47,230 --> 00:02:49,959 photos. So you might think, OK, maybe 73 00:02:49,960 --> 00:02:52,209 I don't feel too bad for them 74 00:02:52,210 --> 00:02:54,279 specifically, but what does it 75 00:02:54,280 --> 00:02:56,679 actually mean for other websites? 76 00:02:56,680 --> 00:02:58,089 Will they now have to monitor 77 00:02:58,090 --> 00:03:00,249 continuously everything that's going 78 00:03:00,250 --> 00:03:01,929 on on the website that they have said 79 00:03:01,930 --> 00:03:03,339 link to? 80 00:03:03,340 --> 00:03:05,529 To find out, we can look 81 00:03:05,530 --> 00:03:07,479 at one ruling that already took place 82 00:03:07,480 --> 00:03:09,969 based on that by everybody's favorite 83 00:03:09,970 --> 00:03:12,009 court, the district court of Hamburg. 84 00:03:15,800 --> 00:03:17,899 I see there are some some fans of 85 00:03:17,900 --> 00:03:19,249 the district court of Hamburg in the 86 00:03:19,250 --> 00:03:21,349 audience, so the district court of 87 00:03:21,350 --> 00:03:23,569 Hamburg had a case where somebody 88 00:03:23,570 --> 00:03:25,969 had linked from their own website 89 00:03:25,970 --> 00:03:28,309 from the About Me page to a different 90 00:03:28,310 --> 00:03:30,919 website on which there was a photograph 91 00:03:30,920 --> 00:03:32,369 that looked a little bit like this. 92 00:03:32,370 --> 00:03:34,939 It's not exactly this picture, actually, 93 00:03:34,940 --> 00:03:37,639 with some UFO, UFO and 94 00:03:37,640 --> 00:03:40,459 this photo had been modified. 95 00:03:40,460 --> 00:03:42,529 The photographer of the original 96 00:03:42,530 --> 00:03:44,749 picture without UFOs had put the 97 00:03:44,750 --> 00:03:47,509 photo under a Creative Commons license 98 00:03:47,510 --> 00:03:49,609 and the person who put it 99 00:03:49,610 --> 00:03:51,649 on their website actually attributed it 100 00:03:51,650 --> 00:03:53,119 to the correct photographer. 101 00:03:53,120 --> 00:03:55,039 However, they did not mention that the 102 00:03:55,040 --> 00:03:56,929 original picture actually didn't contain 103 00:03:56,930 --> 00:03:59,269 UFOs, so therefore it was a 104 00:03:59,270 --> 00:04:00,709 copyright infringement. 105 00:04:00,710 --> 00:04:02,779 So the court decided 106 00:04:02,780 --> 00:04:04,669 that since the website owner of the 107 00:04:04,670 --> 00:04:06,829 website who linked to this 108 00:04:06,830 --> 00:04:08,899 sells educational materials 109 00:04:08,900 --> 00:04:11,149 on the same domain, not on the About Me 110 00:04:11,150 --> 00:04:13,309 page and not related to this 111 00:04:13,310 --> 00:04:15,589 particular link, they have a profit 112 00:04:15,590 --> 00:04:17,599 motive for that link, which is quite a 113 00:04:17,600 --> 00:04:18,409 stretch. 114 00:04:18,410 --> 00:04:20,629 So the defendant in this case, the person 115 00:04:20,630 --> 00:04:23,029 with the About Me page, had an obligation 116 00:04:23,030 --> 00:04:25,159 to actually verify that everything on 117 00:04:25,160 --> 00:04:26,869 the website there were linking to is 118 00:04:26,870 --> 00:04:28,249 legal. 119 00:04:28,250 --> 00:04:30,049 He's a journalist, tried this out in 120 00:04:30,050 --> 00:04:31,879 practice and actually wrote to the court 121 00:04:31,880 --> 00:04:33,829 asking, hey, I want to write about this 122 00:04:33,830 --> 00:04:35,959 court case and I want to link to the 123 00:04:35,960 --> 00:04:37,699 website of the District Court of Hamburg. 124 00:04:37,700 --> 00:04:40,159 Can you please verify to me 125 00:04:40,160 --> 00:04:42,229 that everything on your website is legal? 126 00:04:42,230 --> 00:04:44,299 For some reason, the court didn't want to 127 00:04:44,300 --> 00:04:45,300 do that. 128 00:04:51,590 --> 00:04:53,989 So if you have a website yourself, 129 00:04:53,990 --> 00:04:56,209 you may wonder now hang on, I have 130 00:04:56,210 --> 00:04:57,919 some links on my website. 131 00:04:57,920 --> 00:04:59,569 Am I actually committing copyright 132 00:04:59,570 --> 00:05:00,859 infringement? 133 00:05:00,860 --> 00:05:01,999 I can help you there. 134 00:05:02,000 --> 00:05:03,679 It's quite easy to find out with this 135 00:05:03,680 --> 00:05:05,209 handy chart. 136 00:05:05,210 --> 00:05:07,399 So whether your link 137 00:05:07,400 --> 00:05:09,559 is a copyright infringement 138 00:05:09,560 --> 00:05:11,719 depends on whether the link tries 139 00:05:11,720 --> 00:05:13,879 to circumvent a paywall, whether 140 00:05:13,880 --> 00:05:15,769 it was published or the thing that you're 141 00:05:15,770 --> 00:05:17,449 linking to the content that might be 142 00:05:17,450 --> 00:05:19,129 infringing, whether it was published with 143 00:05:19,130 --> 00:05:21,109 the rights holders consent or not, 144 00:05:21,110 --> 00:05:23,389 whether you as the website 145 00:05:23,390 --> 00:05:25,639 owner who is linking have a profit making 146 00:05:25,640 --> 00:05:27,469 intention, whether you knew that the 147 00:05:27,470 --> 00:05:29,599 content you're linking to was unlawful. 148 00:05:29,600 --> 00:05:32,059 All these things can have an impact 149 00:05:32,060 --> 00:05:34,509 on whether your links are legal or not. 150 00:05:35,570 --> 00:05:37,819 So the claim that the link is under 151 00:05:37,820 --> 00:05:39,919 threat from copyright law is by no means 152 00:05:39,920 --> 00:05:42,139 an exaggeration at this point. 153 00:05:42,140 --> 00:05:44,029 And what neither court considered, 154 00:05:44,030 --> 00:05:46,189 neither the European Court of Justice nor 155 00:05:46,190 --> 00:05:48,169 the District Court of Hamburg, is the 156 00:05:48,170 --> 00:05:49,279 following scenario. 157 00:05:49,280 --> 00:05:51,859 So if linking to an infringement 158 00:05:51,860 --> 00:05:54,049 can be an infringement of copyright 159 00:05:54,050 --> 00:05:56,179 law, shouldn't then linking to the 160 00:05:56,180 --> 00:05:58,129 link to the infringement also be an 161 00:05:58,130 --> 00:05:59,929 infringement of copyright law? 162 00:05:59,930 --> 00:06:02,149 So anyone who was wondering 163 00:06:02,150 --> 00:06:03,979 whether their website is violating 164 00:06:03,980 --> 00:06:06,259 copyright law at this point, chances 165 00:06:06,260 --> 00:06:08,479 are if the website is in any way 166 00:06:08,480 --> 00:06:11,449 commercial, then the answer is yes. 167 00:06:11,450 --> 00:06:13,549 But not everything about 168 00:06:13,550 --> 00:06:15,469 2016 was bad. 169 00:06:15,470 --> 00:06:17,630 There are some good news I can report. 170 00:06:18,650 --> 00:06:19,650 There's this. 171 00:06:28,520 --> 00:06:30,949 Gunter Etinger, the digital commissioner 172 00:06:30,950 --> 00:06:33,259 who is responsible for 173 00:06:33,260 --> 00:06:35,869 copyright law in the European Commission 174 00:06:35,870 --> 00:06:38,089 but perhaps best known for 175 00:06:38,090 --> 00:06:39,979 being too close to lobbyists, for 176 00:06:39,980 --> 00:06:41,689 example, flying around in that private 177 00:06:41,690 --> 00:06:44,029 plane, the guy who called 178 00:06:44,030 --> 00:06:46,219 net neutrality, the net neutrality 179 00:06:46,220 --> 00:06:48,529 defenders, Taliban and used 180 00:06:48,530 --> 00:06:51,469 racist slurs for Chinese people. 181 00:06:51,470 --> 00:06:53,479 This guy is leaving. 182 00:06:53,480 --> 00:06:55,309 He's leaving his post as digital 183 00:06:55,310 --> 00:06:56,479 commissioner. 184 00:06:56,480 --> 00:06:58,609 It's not entirely good news, 185 00:06:58,610 --> 00:07:00,229 unfortunately, because he's actually 186 00:07:00,230 --> 00:07:02,479 being promoted to be the commissioner 187 00:07:02,480 --> 00:07:04,789 responsible for the EU budget and human 188 00:07:04,790 --> 00:07:05,749 resources. 189 00:07:05,750 --> 00:07:08,209 That means, among other things, 190 00:07:08,210 --> 00:07:10,399 it will be his job to enforce the code of 191 00:07:10,400 --> 00:07:12,529 conduct for commissioners that says 192 00:07:12,530 --> 00:07:14,449 how they have to deal with lobbyists and 193 00:07:14,450 --> 00:07:16,159 their diversity strategy. 194 00:07:16,160 --> 00:07:18,889 So that's an interesting choice. 195 00:07:18,890 --> 00:07:21,019 But at least for us, we can 196 00:07:21,020 --> 00:07:22,369 say he's gone. 197 00:07:22,370 --> 00:07:24,439 Unfortunately, he 198 00:07:24,440 --> 00:07:26,509 left a copyright proposal this 199 00:07:26,510 --> 00:07:28,489 September and this proposal is here to 200 00:07:28,490 --> 00:07:29,389 stay. 201 00:07:29,390 --> 00:07:31,489 This copyright reform actually could 202 00:07:31,490 --> 00:07:33,739 have been great. Two years ago when the 203 00:07:33,740 --> 00:07:35,359 new commission was starting out, there 204 00:07:35,360 --> 00:07:37,519 was actually a wide acknowledgment 205 00:07:37,520 --> 00:07:39,349 that there was a problem with copyright 206 00:07:39,350 --> 00:07:41,509 law, that it was too complicated. 207 00:07:41,510 --> 00:07:43,879 But the appointment of 208 00:07:43,880 --> 00:07:46,219 the digital commissioner was a bad sign 209 00:07:46,220 --> 00:07:48,649 already. Back then, unfortunately, 210 00:07:48,650 --> 00:07:50,749 he surpassed even our worst 211 00:07:50,750 --> 00:07:53,239 nightmares and managed to make a proposal 212 00:07:53,240 --> 00:07:55,609 that achieves the unimaginable 213 00:07:55,610 --> 00:07:58,489 to make a bad situation even worse. 214 00:07:58,490 --> 00:08:00,769 This proposal, even though Commissioner 215 00:08:00,770 --> 00:08:03,079 Etinger will no longer be responsible for 216 00:08:03,080 --> 00:08:05,389 her, for it, is now out of the hands 217 00:08:05,390 --> 00:08:06,619 of the European Commission. 218 00:08:06,620 --> 00:08:08,419 So the guy who is taking over 219 00:08:08,420 --> 00:08:10,219 Vice-President Ansip, he will still 220 00:08:10,220 --> 00:08:12,199 participate in negotiations. 221 00:08:12,200 --> 00:08:14,389 But mostly this will be up to 222 00:08:14,390 --> 00:08:16,489 the European Parliament and the council, 223 00:08:16,490 --> 00:08:18,499 where the national governments of the EU 224 00:08:18,500 --> 00:08:20,719 are organized and both of these 225 00:08:20,720 --> 00:08:22,879 bodies can reject the proposal 226 00:08:22,880 --> 00:08:24,439 or make changes to it. 227 00:08:24,440 --> 00:08:26,659 So this is where we are going to have 228 00:08:26,660 --> 00:08:29,749 to change and to stop this legislation. 229 00:08:29,750 --> 00:08:31,909 And in order to show you why 230 00:08:31,910 --> 00:08:34,009 I have prepared 10 everyday things 231 00:08:34,010 --> 00:08:35,569 that would become illegal. 232 00:08:35,570 --> 00:08:37,100 You won't believe number eight. 233 00:08:43,840 --> 00:08:46,119 No one sharing news from 234 00:08:46,120 --> 00:08:47,319 20 years ago. 235 00:08:47,320 --> 00:08:49,449 So if you have a website with a list 236 00:08:49,450 --> 00:08:51,339 of online news articles, for example, 237 00:08:51,340 --> 00:08:53,559 about the copyright wars, with 238 00:08:53,560 --> 00:08:55,629 short quotes like this, 239 00:08:55,630 --> 00:08:58,059 you better take it offline because before 240 00:08:58,060 --> 00:09:00,249 this law becomes 241 00:09:00,250 --> 00:09:03,009 is in place, number two, 242 00:09:03,010 --> 00:09:04,789 tweeting a creative headline. 243 00:09:04,790 --> 00:09:06,489 So here you don't actually even have to 244 00:09:06,490 --> 00:09:09,789 link to any newspaper content. 245 00:09:09,790 --> 00:09:11,859 The publishers are getting a 246 00:09:11,860 --> 00:09:13,929 new ride and they hope that in a case 247 00:09:13,930 --> 00:09:15,939 like this where you're tweeting Business 248 00:09:15,940 --> 00:09:18,189 Pops, it's a famous headline from 249 00:09:18,190 --> 00:09:20,589 a German tabloid newspaper, Bild, 250 00:09:20,590 --> 00:09:22,749 after the election 251 00:09:22,750 --> 00:09:24,339 of the last pope. 252 00:09:24,340 --> 00:09:27,039 It means we are the pope. 253 00:09:27,040 --> 00:09:29,439 And the publishers hope that 254 00:09:29,440 --> 00:09:31,599 whenever you tweet something like this, 255 00:09:31,600 --> 00:09:33,819 Twitter will pay them a blanket blanket 256 00:09:33,820 --> 00:09:35,739 license for that in order to keep it 257 00:09:35,740 --> 00:09:37,959 legal. But if they don't do that 258 00:09:37,960 --> 00:09:39,909 and I don't think they will, then you 259 00:09:39,910 --> 00:09:42,069 will be liable for copyright infringement 260 00:09:42,070 --> 00:09:44,499 or this new publishers right infringement 261 00:09:44,500 --> 00:09:46,659 if you tweet something like this. 262 00:09:46,660 --> 00:09:48,879 Number three, sharing a magazine 263 00:09:48,880 --> 00:09:51,189 article on social media, Twitter 264 00:09:51,190 --> 00:09:53,169 and Facebook and a lot of other social 265 00:09:53,170 --> 00:09:55,449 media create automatic previews 266 00:09:55,450 --> 00:09:57,519 from a Eurail look, something like 267 00:09:57,520 --> 00:09:58,779 this. 268 00:09:58,780 --> 00:10:01,059 This will be no longer 269 00:10:01,060 --> 00:10:02,799 legal. They would have to disable this 270 00:10:02,800 --> 00:10:05,049 function and not just for links 271 00:10:05,050 --> 00:10:07,389 to news, but also any 272 00:10:07,390 --> 00:10:09,639 magazine article or any 273 00:10:09,640 --> 00:10:11,859 blog article, as long as the blog has 274 00:10:11,860 --> 00:10:13,059 multiple offers. 275 00:10:14,260 --> 00:10:16,569 Number four, pinning a photo 276 00:10:16,570 --> 00:10:19,029 to a shopping list using Pinterest 277 00:10:19,030 --> 00:10:21,159 or another visual bookmarking 278 00:10:21,160 --> 00:10:22,160 service like this. 279 00:10:23,320 --> 00:10:25,510 Number five, indexing the web. 280 00:10:33,590 --> 00:10:35,689 Luckily, not all of the Web, I mean, 281 00:10:35,690 --> 00:10:38,179 the problem here is that a search engine 282 00:10:38,180 --> 00:10:39,859 that is indexing the Web for you and 283 00:10:39,860 --> 00:10:42,109 showing you search results 284 00:10:42,110 --> 00:10:44,479 will have to make copies of those indexed 285 00:10:44,480 --> 00:10:45,469 Web pages. 286 00:10:45,470 --> 00:10:47,899 This will no longer be allowed for news 287 00:10:47,900 --> 00:10:50,419 websites, magazine websites and blogs 288 00:10:50,420 --> 00:10:51,979 unless they have given specific 289 00:10:51,980 --> 00:10:52,980 permission for it. 290 00:10:53,990 --> 00:10:56,569 No.6 unmonitored 291 00:10:56,570 --> 00:10:58,669 photo uploads if you're using 292 00:10:58,670 --> 00:11:00,859 a host provider such as Photo Community. 293 00:11:00,860 --> 00:11:02,239 This is a website where people are 294 00:11:02,240 --> 00:11:04,069 sharing their photographs. 295 00:11:04,070 --> 00:11:06,259 This company will have to make 296 00:11:06,260 --> 00:11:08,149 sure that whenever somebody uploads 297 00:11:08,150 --> 00:11:10,519 something, that it is not 298 00:11:10,520 --> 00:11:11,749 a copyright infringement. 299 00:11:11,750 --> 00:11:13,999 So they will have to scan all the photos 300 00:11:14,000 --> 00:11:16,099 that are being uploaded for a potential 301 00:11:16,100 --> 00:11:17,569 copyright infringement. 302 00:11:17,570 --> 00:11:19,969 And this applies to all kinds 303 00:11:19,970 --> 00:11:22,069 of different copyrighted content, such 304 00:11:22,070 --> 00:11:24,769 as, for example, 305 00:11:24,770 --> 00:11:25,789 software. 306 00:11:25,790 --> 00:11:28,069 So this obligation can 307 00:11:28,070 --> 00:11:30,229 apply to a platform such as 308 00:11:30,230 --> 00:11:32,749 GitHub, which is also a file hoster. 309 00:11:32,750 --> 00:11:34,459 And if you're uploading your permits 310 00:11:34,460 --> 00:11:36,619 there, they may very well be under a free 311 00:11:36,620 --> 00:11:37,519 license. 312 00:11:37,520 --> 00:11:40,039 However, they are still protected 313 00:11:40,040 --> 00:11:41,929 by copyright, so they will have to make 314 00:11:41,930 --> 00:11:44,179 sure that nothing illegal is being 315 00:11:44,180 --> 00:11:46,879 uploaded. Their number eight, 316 00:11:46,880 --> 00:11:48,739 the same will go for Wikipedia. 317 00:11:48,740 --> 00:11:51,109 So you may think now, 318 00:11:51,110 --> 00:11:53,209 OK, all the stuff that is on Wikipedia 319 00:11:53,210 --> 00:11:55,309 is either already in the public domain 320 00:11:55,310 --> 00:11:56,899 or is Creative Commons. 321 00:11:56,900 --> 00:11:58,999 So what is actually the point of this? 322 00:11:59,000 --> 00:12:01,099 Unfortunately, this new law does 323 00:12:01,100 --> 00:12:03,739 not distinguish between 324 00:12:03,740 --> 00:12:06,109 hosting platforms where there actually is 325 00:12:06,110 --> 00:12:07,969 a significant problem with copyright 326 00:12:07,970 --> 00:12:09,289 infringement or not. 327 00:12:09,290 --> 00:12:11,689 So unfortunately, platforms like GitHub 328 00:12:11,690 --> 00:12:14,089 or Wikipedia would be affected by this. 329 00:12:14,090 --> 00:12:16,159 And nine, I think this one is a 330 00:12:16,160 --> 00:12:18,469 little bit less of an everyday thing 331 00:12:18,470 --> 00:12:20,089 than the other examples, at least for 332 00:12:20,090 --> 00:12:22,609 now. If you want to train your artificial 333 00:12:22,610 --> 00:12:23,809 intelligence with 334 00:12:25,460 --> 00:12:27,559 publicly available content on the 335 00:12:27,560 --> 00:12:29,629 Web, such as large bodies of texts 336 00:12:29,630 --> 00:12:31,819 or pictures, you 337 00:12:31,820 --> 00:12:34,009 will have to probably make copies of 338 00:12:34,010 --> 00:12:35,509 them in some form. 339 00:12:35,510 --> 00:12:37,699 And the new proposal may also 340 00:12:37,700 --> 00:12:39,499 cause problems with that. 341 00:12:39,500 --> 00:12:41,599 And finally, number 10, all 342 00:12:41,600 --> 00:12:43,489 the stuff that is already illegal that 343 00:12:43,490 --> 00:12:45,709 makes no sense whatsoever is 344 00:12:45,710 --> 00:12:48,259 going to remain illegal because 345 00:12:48,260 --> 00:12:50,359 almost none of the many, many things 346 00:12:50,360 --> 00:12:52,549 that all of you and lots of other people 347 00:12:52,550 --> 00:12:54,529 have highlighted to the commission as 348 00:12:54,530 --> 00:12:57,019 being fundamental problems with copyright 349 00:12:57,020 --> 00:12:59,179 law have not been addressed 350 00:12:59,180 --> 00:13:00,019 in this proposal. 351 00:13:00,020 --> 00:13:02,539 So, for example, taking photos 352 00:13:02,540 --> 00:13:04,849 of architecture 353 00:13:04,850 --> 00:13:07,069 in or public artworks 354 00:13:07,070 --> 00:13:09,499 in public places will continue to be 355 00:13:09,500 --> 00:13:11,989 a copyright infringement in many European 356 00:13:11,990 --> 00:13:14,239 countries and also the 357 00:13:14,240 --> 00:13:16,669 large amounts of online pop culture 358 00:13:16,670 --> 00:13:18,949 that are going on that are not really in 359 00:13:18,950 --> 00:13:20,869 line with the copyright laws, such as 360 00:13:20,870 --> 00:13:23,719 reaction GIFs, let's play videos, 361 00:13:23,720 --> 00:13:25,489 dubs at remixes. 362 00:13:25,490 --> 00:13:27,469 They are not being addressed at all. 363 00:13:27,470 --> 00:13:29,809 So people will continue to do a lot of 364 00:13:29,810 --> 00:13:31,999 great cultural activity that 365 00:13:32,000 --> 00:13:34,429 just doesn't really fit the copyright 366 00:13:34,430 --> 00:13:36,769 system. And this one may surprise 367 00:13:36,770 --> 00:13:38,119 you a little bit. 368 00:13:38,120 --> 00:13:40,459 One hosting provider that actually won't 369 00:13:40,460 --> 00:13:42,859 be affected by these laws at all is 370 00:13:42,860 --> 00:13:43,860 Megaupload. 371 00:13:45,170 --> 00:13:47,479 The law is not actually aimed at sites 372 00:13:47,480 --> 00:13:49,159 that that play fast and loose with 373 00:13:49,160 --> 00:13:51,349 copyright. It's meant to get 374 00:13:51,350 --> 00:13:53,629 the really big moneymakers, the social 375 00:13:53,630 --> 00:13:55,759 networks and the search engines 376 00:13:55,760 --> 00:13:57,859 Google mostly to pay money to 377 00:13:57,860 --> 00:14:00,169 struggling European cultural industries. 378 00:14:00,170 --> 00:14:02,329 And this is all that this law is 379 00:14:02,330 --> 00:14:04,519 aimed at. So how can you get 380 00:14:04,520 --> 00:14:06,589 such wildly contradictory 381 00:14:06,590 --> 00:14:08,209 and weird results? 382 00:14:08,210 --> 00:14:10,399 Well, there are two proposals in this 383 00:14:10,400 --> 00:14:12,649 new draft copyright law that 384 00:14:12,650 --> 00:14:15,709 Etinger has presented that 385 00:14:15,710 --> 00:14:17,239 cause all these problems. 386 00:14:17,240 --> 00:14:19,849 One is an attack on the hyperlink beyond 387 00:14:19,850 --> 00:14:21,469 all the problems with linking and 388 00:14:21,470 --> 00:14:23,539 copyright that we already have. 389 00:14:23,540 --> 00:14:25,909 And the other one is an attack on 390 00:14:25,910 --> 00:14:28,309 the legally sound hosting 391 00:14:28,310 --> 00:14:29,899 of files on the Internet. 392 00:14:31,160 --> 00:14:33,499 So the first one is 393 00:14:33,500 --> 00:14:36,049 it comes in the form of a new 394 00:14:36,050 --> 00:14:38,299 extra layer of copyright protection 395 00:14:38,300 --> 00:14:40,009 for the benefit of publishers. 396 00:14:40,010 --> 00:14:42,409 This is the so-called neighboring right. 397 00:14:42,410 --> 00:14:44,569 And it applies on 398 00:14:44,570 --> 00:14:46,939 top of the copyright that journalists 399 00:14:46,940 --> 00:14:49,039 already get in the articles they write 400 00:14:49,040 --> 00:14:51,079 and that they usually transfer in the 401 00:14:51,080 --> 00:14:53,239 form of exclusive rights to the 402 00:14:53,240 --> 00:14:54,979 publishers. So it's not like the 403 00:14:54,980 --> 00:14:57,259 publishers cannot enforce 404 00:14:57,260 --> 00:14:59,359 journalists' copyright at the moment, but 405 00:14:59,360 --> 00:15:01,459 this is an extra layer of 406 00:15:01,460 --> 00:15:03,799 protection that would apply 407 00:15:03,800 --> 00:15:05,749 in addition to the already existing 408 00:15:05,750 --> 00:15:06,739 copyright. 409 00:15:06,740 --> 00:15:08,839 This is the legal text or part 410 00:15:08,840 --> 00:15:10,939 of it where you can see, 411 00:15:10,940 --> 00:15:13,069 OK, we are talking here about a new 412 00:15:13,070 --> 00:15:15,649 protection for press publications 413 00:15:15,650 --> 00:15:18,109 for which will allow the publishers, 414 00:15:18,110 --> 00:15:20,119 on the one hand, to control the copying 415 00:15:20,120 --> 00:15:22,159 of those articles and the making 416 00:15:22,160 --> 00:15:23,779 available of those articles on the 417 00:15:23,780 --> 00:15:24,709 Internet. 418 00:15:24,710 --> 00:15:26,899 And this ride lasts for 419 00:15:26,900 --> 00:15:29,059 twenty years after publication of 420 00:15:29,060 --> 00:15:31,459 a press publication this may sound 421 00:15:31,460 --> 00:15:32,369 familiar to. 422 00:15:32,370 --> 00:15:33,839 There has been something similar 423 00:15:33,840 --> 00:15:35,849 introduced in Germany a few years ago 424 00:15:35,850 --> 00:15:38,129 where the the amount 425 00:15:38,130 --> 00:15:40,049 of protection is one year because they 426 00:15:40,050 --> 00:15:42,389 consider it well, actually, news articles 427 00:15:42,390 --> 00:15:44,519 are not that valuable after a while, but 428 00:15:44,520 --> 00:15:46,799 they consider 20 years is a good 429 00:15:46,800 --> 00:15:49,289 time for this new protection 430 00:15:49,290 --> 00:15:50,519 and it would actually apply 431 00:15:50,520 --> 00:15:51,899 retroactively. 432 00:15:51,900 --> 00:15:53,879 So that means if you are running a 433 00:15:53,880 --> 00:15:56,159 website with a list of news stories about 434 00:15:56,160 --> 00:15:58,409 the Napster case, with quotes 435 00:15:58,410 --> 00:16:00,569 from articles about the copyright wars 436 00:16:00,570 --> 00:16:02,759 in different ways, this will be 437 00:16:02,760 --> 00:16:03,760 illegal. 438 00:16:04,800 --> 00:16:05,819 You may think now. 439 00:16:05,820 --> 00:16:06,719 But wait a second. 440 00:16:06,720 --> 00:16:08,579 Isn't quoting generally legal? 441 00:16:08,580 --> 00:16:10,379 Isn't there copyright exception that 442 00:16:10,380 --> 00:16:11,849 allows us to quote? 443 00:16:11,850 --> 00:16:14,009 Well, in a lot of European countries, 444 00:16:14,010 --> 00:16:16,109 the quotation exception, for example, 445 00:16:16,110 --> 00:16:18,299 in Germany only applies when 446 00:16:18,300 --> 00:16:20,369 the quotes are in the broader context 447 00:16:20,370 --> 00:16:21,699 of criticism or reviews. 448 00:16:21,700 --> 00:16:23,489 So simply having a list of interesting 449 00:16:23,490 --> 00:16:25,769 articles where you are 450 00:16:25,770 --> 00:16:27,749 taking the headline of that article or 451 00:16:27,750 --> 00:16:29,879 short part of the text wouldn't count. 452 00:16:29,880 --> 00:16:31,199 You actually would have to write some 453 00:16:31,200 --> 00:16:33,299 kind of academic treatise about the 454 00:16:33,300 --> 00:16:34,859 thing and 455 00:16:36,180 --> 00:16:38,399 who is actually the intended 456 00:16:38,400 --> 00:16:39,819 target of this proposal. 457 00:16:39,820 --> 00:16:42,569 So what is trying to achieve? 458 00:16:42,570 --> 00:16:44,639 Who does he want to pay 459 00:16:44,640 --> 00:16:46,829 money for this for these 460 00:16:46,830 --> 00:16:48,659 new snippets to the publishers? 461 00:16:48,660 --> 00:16:50,759 He has actually answered that in a number 462 00:16:50,760 --> 00:16:52,379 of interviews. 463 00:16:52,380 --> 00:16:54,659 And what he said there is the targets are 464 00:16:54,660 --> 00:16:57,269 Twitter, the iPhone 465 00:16:58,470 --> 00:17:01,079 tablets and Facebook. 466 00:17:02,430 --> 00:17:04,409 I think it gives you a bit of an idea of 467 00:17:04,410 --> 00:17:06,598 his technical understanding between 468 00:17:06,599 --> 00:17:08,669 the differences between an online 469 00:17:08,670 --> 00:17:10,949 service, a particular company's product 470 00:17:10,950 --> 00:17:12,358 and a technology. 471 00:17:12,359 --> 00:17:13,359 But OK, 472 00:17:14,700 --> 00:17:16,828 I think the the gist of it is 473 00:17:16,829 --> 00:17:19,108 that the kinds of automatic previews that 474 00:17:19,109 --> 00:17:21,539 a lot of social networks do 475 00:17:21,540 --> 00:17:23,608 when you post to your URL will no 476 00:17:23,609 --> 00:17:24,719 longer be allowed. 477 00:17:24,720 --> 00:17:26,999 And you really have a problem if the 478 00:17:27,000 --> 00:17:29,069 URL itself already contains the 479 00:17:29,070 --> 00:17:30,809 headline, which, let's face it, is not 480 00:17:30,810 --> 00:17:32,579 that uncommon. 481 00:17:32,580 --> 00:17:34,649 So and it's also it's 482 00:17:34,650 --> 00:17:36,809 very odd to see how how 483 00:17:36,810 --> 00:17:38,189 this would play out, because the 484 00:17:38,190 --> 00:17:40,259 publishers actually employ 485 00:17:40,260 --> 00:17:42,659 social media experts who optimize 486 00:17:42,660 --> 00:17:44,669 these previews to make sure that as many 487 00:17:44,670 --> 00:17:46,799 people as possible click on them and they 488 00:17:46,800 --> 00:17:48,509 change the codes of their websites to 489 00:17:48,510 --> 00:17:50,669 make sure that exactly the right pictures 490 00:17:50,670 --> 00:17:52,919 and text are chosen for those previews. 491 00:17:52,920 --> 00:17:55,139 But even though this 492 00:17:55,140 --> 00:17:57,509 law goes beyond the failed 493 00:17:57,510 --> 00:17:59,299 German version of this law, the license 494 00:17:59,300 --> 00:18:00,569 should threshed. 495 00:18:00,570 --> 00:18:02,609 The logic is quite the same here. 496 00:18:02,610 --> 00:18:04,979 We look at which companies are making 497 00:18:04,980 --> 00:18:07,109 money in the Internet ecosystems, all 498 00:18:07,110 --> 00:18:09,069 they're all American tech companies. 499 00:18:09,070 --> 00:18:11,159 Let's take that money from 500 00:18:11,160 --> 00:18:13,019 those companies that are sending traffic 501 00:18:13,020 --> 00:18:15,209 to the German publishers 502 00:18:15,210 --> 00:18:17,339 who, by the way, are also lobbying for 503 00:18:17,340 --> 00:18:19,409 this law. And let's have 504 00:18:19,410 --> 00:18:21,479 them give this this money 505 00:18:21,480 --> 00:18:22,829 on top of the traffic that they're 506 00:18:22,830 --> 00:18:23,850 already sending them 507 00:18:25,800 --> 00:18:27,779 to. Attinger has also told us something 508 00:18:27,780 --> 00:18:30,509 about what exactly 509 00:18:30,510 --> 00:18:31,979 how short a tax can be. 510 00:18:31,980 --> 00:18:33,089 So it applies to it. 511 00:18:33,090 --> 00:18:35,399 And he says that, yes, headlines 512 00:18:35,400 --> 00:18:37,619 are intended to be covered by this. 513 00:18:37,620 --> 00:18:39,479 So this really creates a problem for 514 00:18:39,480 --> 00:18:41,879 hyperlinks where very often the headline 515 00:18:41,880 --> 00:18:43,379 is part of the URL. 516 00:18:43,380 --> 00:18:44,939 And he says, we're not talking about 517 00:18:44,940 --> 00:18:47,279 purely factual headlines like airplane 518 00:18:47,280 --> 00:18:48,179 crash in Africa. 519 00:18:48,180 --> 00:18:49,799 I think he thinks that Africa is a 520 00:18:49,800 --> 00:18:50,249 country. 521 00:18:50,250 --> 00:18:52,409 Otherwise, I'm not sure why 522 00:18:52,410 --> 00:18:53,970 he thinks this is a common headline. 523 00:19:00,410 --> 00:19:02,509 But in any case, there is nothing in the 524 00:19:02,510 --> 00:19:04,879 law that actually exempts single 525 00:19:04,880 --> 00:19:07,039 words or small snippets of text from 526 00:19:07,040 --> 00:19:09,309 this protection and urging, 527 00:19:09,310 --> 00:19:11,089 and the publishers keep saying that 528 00:19:11,090 --> 00:19:12,979 individuals won't be affected by this 529 00:19:12,980 --> 00:19:15,319 law, but actually there is no exception 530 00:19:15,320 --> 00:19:16,789 for private individuals or for 531 00:19:16,790 --> 00:19:18,949 noncommercial use in this law, unlike 532 00:19:18,950 --> 00:19:20,479 the German one, by the way. 533 00:19:20,480 --> 00:19:22,819 So something like Via Bits and Pops 534 00:19:22,820 --> 00:19:24,769 will be an infringement under this new 535 00:19:24,770 --> 00:19:27,079 law. And unlike what Uttinger says 536 00:19:27,080 --> 00:19:29,239 here, it probably won't matter 537 00:19:29,240 --> 00:19:31,759 at all whether it's a purely factual 538 00:19:31,760 --> 00:19:33,679 headline or not, because these 539 00:19:33,680 --> 00:19:35,689 neighboring rights to copyright don't 540 00:19:35,690 --> 00:19:37,939 have a requirement that 541 00:19:37,940 --> 00:19:39,919 the thing they protect is an original 542 00:19:39,920 --> 00:19:41,779 intellectual creation because the 543 00:19:41,780 --> 00:19:44,389 publishers aren't originally 544 00:19:44,390 --> 00:19:46,729 creating anything in the first place. 545 00:19:46,730 --> 00:19:49,279 So the only way that somehow 546 00:19:49,280 --> 00:19:51,409 factual headlines could be exempted is 547 00:19:51,410 --> 00:19:54,049 if a court decides we can't actually tell 548 00:19:54,050 --> 00:19:56,029 whether it was taken from this newspaper 549 00:19:56,030 --> 00:19:57,450 article or from another one. 550 00:19:59,480 --> 00:20:01,579 So what what is up with this 551 00:20:01,580 --> 00:20:03,439 indexing thing? 552 00:20:03,440 --> 00:20:05,749 I think this is probably a really big 553 00:20:05,750 --> 00:20:07,759 problem with this law that not everybody 554 00:20:07,760 --> 00:20:11,179 has a fully considered because 555 00:20:11,180 --> 00:20:13,669 the indexing, of course, of websites 556 00:20:13,670 --> 00:20:15,139 creates copies. 557 00:20:15,140 --> 00:20:16,969 And you may think, well, if somebody 558 00:20:16,970 --> 00:20:19,579 takes a full copy of an article, 559 00:20:19,580 --> 00:20:21,229 isn't that a copyright infringement 560 00:20:21,230 --> 00:20:23,059 already? It would be. 561 00:20:23,060 --> 00:20:25,159 But so far this is legal under the 562 00:20:25,160 --> 00:20:27,469 only mandatory copyright exception 563 00:20:27,470 --> 00:20:29,329 that all of the member states in the EU 564 00:20:29,330 --> 00:20:32,269 have to do, which allows 565 00:20:32,270 --> 00:20:34,339 the copy in the making of so-called 566 00:20:34,340 --> 00:20:36,409 incidental copies that are part 567 00:20:36,410 --> 00:20:38,599 of a technological process for 568 00:20:38,600 --> 00:20:41,119 the sole purpose of enabling a lawful 569 00:20:41,120 --> 00:20:43,219 use. So you could say, of 570 00:20:43,220 --> 00:20:45,049 course, so far the displaying of search 571 00:20:45,050 --> 00:20:46,699 results has been a lawful use. 572 00:20:46,700 --> 00:20:48,799 Therefore, this kind of copy that is just 573 00:20:48,800 --> 00:20:51,049 necessary for search engines is 574 00:20:51,050 --> 00:20:52,759 not an infringement. 575 00:20:52,760 --> 00:20:54,979 However, as soon as the search 576 00:20:54,980 --> 00:20:56,869 engines are no longer allowed to show the 577 00:20:56,870 --> 00:20:58,969 snippets of news articles, of 578 00:20:58,970 --> 00:21:01,309 course the indexing 579 00:21:01,310 --> 00:21:03,379 of news websites will 580 00:21:03,380 --> 00:21:04,969 no longer be legal either. 581 00:21:04,970 --> 00:21:07,129 So that's a bit of a headache and I'm 582 00:21:07,130 --> 00:21:09,379 not sure they have fully considered this 583 00:21:09,380 --> 00:21:10,380 so. 584 00:21:11,620 --> 00:21:13,749 When you look at the definition of 585 00:21:13,750 --> 00:21:15,489 a press publication, which is the stuff 586 00:21:15,490 --> 00:21:17,589 that's going to be protected by 587 00:21:17,590 --> 00:21:19,689 this new right, it's not just 588 00:21:19,690 --> 00:21:21,789 about news articles 589 00:21:21,790 --> 00:21:24,189 as such, but rather everything 590 00:21:24,190 --> 00:21:26,139 that is published in a press publication 591 00:21:26,140 --> 00:21:27,099 online. 592 00:21:27,100 --> 00:21:29,379 So this could include, for example, what 593 00:21:29,380 --> 00:21:31,509 they call other works, could 594 00:21:31,510 --> 00:21:33,219 be pictures or stuff like that. 595 00:21:33,220 --> 00:21:35,679 And this is why Pinterest, for example, 596 00:21:35,680 --> 00:21:37,929 that only allow you to pin pictures, 597 00:21:37,930 --> 00:21:39,999 will have to negotiate a license with the 598 00:21:40,000 --> 00:21:41,229 publishers. 599 00:21:41,230 --> 00:21:43,329 However, I don't think that Pinterest 600 00:21:43,330 --> 00:21:45,309 will be too much up in arms about this 601 00:21:45,310 --> 00:21:47,169 proposal because they have a much bigger 602 00:21:47,170 --> 00:21:48,170 problem. 603 00:21:49,120 --> 00:21:51,549 The Article 13 is probably 604 00:21:51,550 --> 00:21:54,039 the most dangerous of this new proposal. 605 00:21:54,040 --> 00:21:56,259 It contains a the 606 00:21:56,260 --> 00:21:58,749 monitoring obligation for most providers 607 00:21:58,750 --> 00:22:00,789 that I have mentioned earlier. 608 00:22:00,790 --> 00:22:03,219 So who is covered 609 00:22:03,220 --> 00:22:04,639 by this new obligation? 610 00:22:04,640 --> 00:22:07,119 It's hosting providers 611 00:22:07,120 --> 00:22:09,339 that store and provide to the public 612 00:22:09,340 --> 00:22:11,529 access to large amounts of 613 00:22:11,530 --> 00:22:13,839 works uploaded by users. 614 00:22:13,840 --> 00:22:15,909 So when they fall under 615 00:22:15,910 --> 00:22:18,009 this definition, they will have to 616 00:22:18,010 --> 00:22:19,869 choose between two alternative 617 00:22:19,870 --> 00:22:21,069 obligations. 618 00:22:21,070 --> 00:22:23,349 Either they get a license from the rights 619 00:22:23,350 --> 00:22:25,269 holders, probably from collecting 620 00:22:25,270 --> 00:22:27,399 societies or large rights holders 621 00:22:27,400 --> 00:22:29,559 organizations, and they will have to 622 00:22:29,560 --> 00:22:31,209 make sure that those licenses are 623 00:22:31,210 --> 00:22:32,199 enforced. 624 00:22:32,200 --> 00:22:34,359 And helpfully, in the recitals 625 00:22:34,360 --> 00:22:36,129 that go along with this proposal, the 626 00:22:36,130 --> 00:22:38,289 commission suggests that they 627 00:22:38,290 --> 00:22:40,599 could enforce them by using content 628 00:22:40,600 --> 00:22:42,909 monitoring technologies. 629 00:22:42,910 --> 00:22:45,099 If they don't want to do that, then they 630 00:22:45,100 --> 00:22:47,229 have to prevent the availability of 631 00:22:47,230 --> 00:22:49,179 copyrighted works identified by the 632 00:22:49,180 --> 00:22:51,519 rights holders, for example, by using 633 00:22:51,520 --> 00:22:53,319 content monitoring technologies. 634 00:22:53,320 --> 00:22:54,730 So those are the two options. 635 00:22:57,550 --> 00:22:59,709 If you're familiar with Internet law 636 00:22:59,710 --> 00:23:01,239 a little bit, the way it works at the 637 00:23:01,240 --> 00:23:03,879 moment is if you run a file holster 638 00:23:03,880 --> 00:23:06,009 and somebody notifies you 639 00:23:06,010 --> 00:23:08,079 that there is a copyright infringement 640 00:23:08,080 --> 00:23:10,029 on your service, you have to take it 641 00:23:10,030 --> 00:23:11,559 down. It's a notice and takedown 642 00:23:11,560 --> 00:23:13,929 procedure and 643 00:23:13,930 --> 00:23:16,269 the preventing 644 00:23:16,270 --> 00:23:18,819 availability that is included in this 645 00:23:18,820 --> 00:23:21,369 new provision, of course, implies 646 00:23:21,370 --> 00:23:23,679 that these retroactive takedowns after 647 00:23:23,680 --> 00:23:25,599 the infringement has already taken place 648 00:23:25,600 --> 00:23:27,609 will not be enough anymore. 649 00:23:27,610 --> 00:23:29,799 Preventing availability means 650 00:23:29,800 --> 00:23:32,019 that the content needs 651 00:23:32,020 --> 00:23:34,299 to be controlled and scanned before 652 00:23:34,300 --> 00:23:36,399 the upload actually becomes accessible 653 00:23:36,400 --> 00:23:38,029 to the public. 654 00:23:38,030 --> 00:23:40,089 And if you're looking at this, it 655 00:23:40,090 --> 00:23:42,249 might all look a little bit 656 00:23:42,250 --> 00:23:43,359 familiar to you. 657 00:23:43,360 --> 00:23:45,279 And there's clearly an elephant in the 658 00:23:45,280 --> 00:23:48,249 room here, and that's YouTube. 659 00:23:48,250 --> 00:23:50,349 If you look at the analysis, the economic 660 00:23:50,350 --> 00:23:52,509 analysis of why the commission is doing 661 00:23:52,510 --> 00:23:54,789 this, it all comes down to the music 662 00:23:54,790 --> 00:23:57,129 industry complaining about YouTube. 663 00:23:57,130 --> 00:23:58,179 And 664 00:23:59,230 --> 00:24:01,719 this is connected to their content 665 00:24:01,720 --> 00:24:03,969 ID call monitoring system that 666 00:24:03,970 --> 00:24:06,579 is used to find protected 667 00:24:06,580 --> 00:24:09,129 pieces of music on YouTube. 668 00:24:09,130 --> 00:24:11,229 What the music industry has 669 00:24:11,230 --> 00:24:13,299 done about YouTube 670 00:24:13,300 --> 00:24:15,219 so far as they have tried to enter 671 00:24:15,220 --> 00:24:16,869 licensing deals with YouTube. 672 00:24:16,870 --> 00:24:19,449 And actually these licensing agreements 673 00:24:19,450 --> 00:24:22,629 are in place in most countries. 674 00:24:22,630 --> 00:24:24,789 But the rights holders are not very happy 675 00:24:24,790 --> 00:24:26,409 with those deals because they think that 676 00:24:26,410 --> 00:24:28,389 YouTube doesn't pay enough. 677 00:24:28,390 --> 00:24:30,459 And this is this new 678 00:24:30,460 --> 00:24:32,319 law is their solution to this problem. 679 00:24:32,320 --> 00:24:34,689 So they want to make the licensing 680 00:24:34,690 --> 00:24:36,879 deals that they already 681 00:24:36,880 --> 00:24:39,219 have with YouTube the less painful 682 00:24:39,220 --> 00:24:41,619 option, because the other 683 00:24:41,620 --> 00:24:43,149 option, the content monitoring 684 00:24:43,150 --> 00:24:45,489 technologies in the case of YouTube, 685 00:24:45,490 --> 00:24:47,829 is something that YouTube only offers to 686 00:24:47,830 --> 00:24:49,659 a relatively small number of smaller 687 00:24:49,660 --> 00:24:51,519 rights holders. So content ID is not 688 00:24:51,520 --> 00:24:53,979 available for everyone who uses YouTube. 689 00:24:53,980 --> 00:24:55,929 And they think that if YouTube can no 690 00:24:55,930 --> 00:24:57,069 longer threaten. 691 00:24:57,070 --> 00:24:59,859 OK, well, if you don't take our licensing 692 00:24:59,860 --> 00:25:01,899 agreement where we pay you very little, 693 00:25:01,900 --> 00:25:03,489 then we'll just take down all the 694 00:25:03,490 --> 00:25:05,049 content. But the rights holders actually 695 00:25:05,050 --> 00:25:07,119 want to be on YouTube, so they're in a 696 00:25:07,120 --> 00:25:09,339 very weak bargaining position and 697 00:25:09,340 --> 00:25:11,379 they think that this law will somehow 698 00:25:11,380 --> 00:25:13,749 make it so unattractive for YouTube to 699 00:25:13,750 --> 00:25:16,149 to take down the content 700 00:25:16,150 --> 00:25:18,519 that they will pay them more money. 701 00:25:18,520 --> 00:25:19,839 It's a bit of a gamble. 702 00:25:19,840 --> 00:25:21,969 And it's also not a very obvious way of 703 00:25:21,970 --> 00:25:23,229 addressing this problem, because 704 00:25:23,230 --> 00:25:25,329 unfortunately, you can't pass a 705 00:25:25,330 --> 00:25:27,729 law that only applies to YouTube. 706 00:25:27,730 --> 00:25:29,050 They've tried, believe me. 707 00:25:30,580 --> 00:25:32,709 So this law would, of course, apply 708 00:25:32,710 --> 00:25:35,049 to all kinds of false providers 709 00:25:35,050 --> 00:25:37,509 and all types of copyrighted works 710 00:25:37,510 --> 00:25:39,609 as long as there are large amounts 711 00:25:39,610 --> 00:25:41,439 uploaded by users. 712 00:25:41,440 --> 00:25:43,899 So the question 713 00:25:43,900 --> 00:25:46,329 of why get up now falls 714 00:25:46,330 --> 00:25:47,709 under this? Well, you can look at the 715 00:25:47,710 --> 00:25:49,029 content that is stored there. 716 00:25:49,030 --> 00:25:50,229 It's software. 717 00:25:50,230 --> 00:25:52,509 Software is covered by copyright law. 718 00:25:52,510 --> 00:25:54,609 And the question is, is 719 00:25:54,610 --> 00:25:57,129 GitHub an information society service 720 00:25:57,130 --> 00:25:59,199 provider that provides 721 00:25:59,200 --> 00:26:01,629 access to large amounts of works uploaded 722 00:26:01,630 --> 00:26:02,589 by users? 723 00:26:02,590 --> 00:26:04,809 So an information society service 724 00:26:04,810 --> 00:26:07,539 provider is a service that is provided 725 00:26:07,540 --> 00:26:09,519 and it says so in another law. 726 00:26:09,520 --> 00:26:11,829 Normally for remuneration. 727 00:26:11,830 --> 00:26:13,659 So what does that mean normally for 728 00:26:13,660 --> 00:26:14,739 remuneration? 729 00:26:14,740 --> 00:26:16,899 It means that, for example, if 730 00:26:16,900 --> 00:26:19,179 GitHub or also photo community 731 00:26:19,180 --> 00:26:21,309 are freemium services, which they are. 732 00:26:21,310 --> 00:26:23,139 So there's a free version of it, but you 733 00:26:23,140 --> 00:26:25,509 can pay to get some extra feature 734 00:26:25,510 --> 00:26:27,849 then it's a service normally provided by 735 00:26:27,850 --> 00:26:29,139 for remuneration. 736 00:26:29,140 --> 00:26:30,759 So they're covered by this. 737 00:26:30,760 --> 00:26:33,099 However, also noncommercial 738 00:26:33,100 --> 00:26:35,229 health providers can accidentally 739 00:26:35,230 --> 00:26:36,549 be covered by this provision. 740 00:26:37,600 --> 00:26:40,299 A service normally provided 741 00:26:40,300 --> 00:26:42,699 for remuneration can be, for example, 742 00:26:42,700 --> 00:26:44,859 a service that regularly asks for 743 00:26:44,860 --> 00:26:45,919 donations. 744 00:26:45,920 --> 00:26:48,189 And this is where Wikipedia comes in. 745 00:26:48,190 --> 00:26:50,389 And even something like archived 746 00:26:50,390 --> 00:26:52,569 dot org where academics 747 00:26:52,570 --> 00:26:54,999 are uploading articles could be covered 748 00:26:55,000 --> 00:26:56,769 by this new provision. 749 00:26:56,770 --> 00:26:59,439 If there are a similar services available 750 00:26:59,440 --> 00:27:01,509 that do charge money that are in some 751 00:27:01,510 --> 00:27:03,429 way in competition with archive. 752 00:27:03,430 --> 00:27:05,499 So in this way, even a service that 753 00:27:05,500 --> 00:27:07,059 is completely noncommercial and 754 00:27:07,060 --> 00:27:09,279 completely for free to use can 755 00:27:09,280 --> 00:27:11,829 still fall under this definition. 756 00:27:11,830 --> 00:27:13,210 You may also wonder, 757 00:27:14,410 --> 00:27:16,269 well, is this really a problem for 758 00:27:16,270 --> 00:27:18,069 archive dot org or for Wikipedia? 759 00:27:18,070 --> 00:27:20,139 Because there aren't really a 760 00:27:20,140 --> 00:27:22,209 lot of infringements taking place 761 00:27:22,210 --> 00:27:24,879 there. But nowhere 762 00:27:24,880 --> 00:27:26,949 in the Article 13 does it actually 763 00:27:26,950 --> 00:27:29,079 say that this only applies to 764 00:27:29,080 --> 00:27:30,849 host providers with large amounts of 765 00:27:30,850 --> 00:27:32,049 copyright infringement. 766 00:27:32,050 --> 00:27:33,999 That just says large amounts of upload. 767 00:27:34,000 --> 00:27:34,899 It works. 768 00:27:34,900 --> 00:27:37,239 So licensed content 769 00:27:37,240 --> 00:27:39,729 or articles 770 00:27:39,730 --> 00:27:41,619 that have already been published with an 771 00:27:41,620 --> 00:27:43,569 academic publisher and then are put on 772 00:27:43,570 --> 00:27:45,519 archive would very well fall under this 773 00:27:45,520 --> 00:27:47,259 definition. Then there's a final 774 00:27:47,260 --> 00:27:49,149 question. What exactly large amounts of 775 00:27:49,150 --> 00:27:50,109 works means? 776 00:27:50,110 --> 00:27:52,179 It's completely undefined and 777 00:27:52,180 --> 00:27:54,339 probably the 28 member states of the 778 00:27:54,340 --> 00:27:55,929 European Union would find different 779 00:27:55,930 --> 00:27:56,889 definitions of this. 780 00:27:56,890 --> 00:27:58,929 So that's a great idea if you want to 781 00:27:58,930 --> 00:28:00,189 encourage trade. 782 00:28:00,190 --> 00:28:02,529 But all of these services that I've named 783 00:28:02,530 --> 00:28:04,839 host well over a million works 784 00:28:04,840 --> 00:28:06,699 so we can assume that they would all be 785 00:28:06,700 --> 00:28:07,700 covered. 786 00:28:08,950 --> 00:28:11,019 So that means that 787 00:28:11,020 --> 00:28:13,089 most providers find themselves in a very 788 00:28:13,090 --> 00:28:15,279 difficult position under this new law 789 00:28:15,280 --> 00:28:17,379 because they must either pay 790 00:28:17,380 --> 00:28:19,209 rights holders for content they don't 791 00:28:19,210 --> 00:28:21,459 really want to use in most cases 792 00:28:21,460 --> 00:28:23,319 or start filtering everything that's 793 00:28:23,320 --> 00:28:24,369 uploaded. 794 00:28:24,370 --> 00:28:26,409 But filter for what exactly? 795 00:28:26,410 --> 00:28:28,569 I mean, the YouTube case is relatively 796 00:28:28,570 --> 00:28:30,579 straightforward and maybe the photo 797 00:28:30,580 --> 00:28:31,869 community case as well. 798 00:28:31,870 --> 00:28:34,659 If you're looking for recordings of music 799 00:28:34,660 --> 00:28:36,789 or photographs, you can use the 800 00:28:36,790 --> 00:28:38,829 fingerprinting technology where you check 801 00:28:38,830 --> 00:28:40,419 every upload against the reference 802 00:28:40,420 --> 00:28:41,049 database. 803 00:28:41,050 --> 00:28:42,639 It's not completely trivial, but it's 804 00:28:42,640 --> 00:28:43,809 doable. 805 00:28:43,810 --> 00:28:45,999 Unfortunately, copyrighted works can 806 00:28:46,000 --> 00:28:47,619 be all kinds of things. 807 00:28:47,620 --> 00:28:50,139 For example, the sculpture on this slide 808 00:28:50,140 --> 00:28:51,939 is protected by copyright. 809 00:28:51,940 --> 00:28:54,489 And a photograph of this sculpture, 810 00:28:54,490 --> 00:28:56,259 at least if you're in a country without 811 00:28:56,260 --> 00:28:58,389 freedom of panorama, would also be 812 00:28:58,390 --> 00:29:00,159 a copyright infringement, which means 813 00:29:00,160 --> 00:29:01,989 that this technology would actually have 814 00:29:01,990 --> 00:29:04,209 to identify a photograph of 815 00:29:04,210 --> 00:29:06,340 this sculpture from every possible angle. 816 00:29:07,390 --> 00:29:09,519 Translations of texts can be 817 00:29:09,520 --> 00:29:10,599 copyright infringement. 818 00:29:10,600 --> 00:29:12,849 So the software would need to make 819 00:29:12,850 --> 00:29:15,129 sure whether a translated text is 820 00:29:15,130 --> 00:29:17,259 actually equivalent to the same text 821 00:29:17,260 --> 00:29:19,719 in another language that is protected. 822 00:29:19,720 --> 00:29:21,939 Also using a character from 823 00:29:21,940 --> 00:29:24,099 a popular novel or a popular film 824 00:29:24,100 --> 00:29:26,529 in your own film or using 825 00:29:26,530 --> 00:29:28,659 code of somebody else in your own 826 00:29:28,660 --> 00:29:30,669 software without respecting the license 827 00:29:30,670 --> 00:29:32,319 conditions, for example, because you 828 00:29:32,320 --> 00:29:34,389 didn't post the GPL notice. 829 00:29:34,390 --> 00:29:36,219 All of these can be copyright 830 00:29:36,220 --> 00:29:38,139 infringements and they are not as easy to 831 00:29:38,140 --> 00:29:40,509 detect as somebody has uploaded a music 832 00:29:40,510 --> 00:29:42,009 video to YouTube. 833 00:29:42,010 --> 00:29:44,199 And as we have 834 00:29:44,200 --> 00:29:46,779 learned in the beginning, hyperlinks 835 00:29:46,780 --> 00:29:49,389 can be a copyright infringement 836 00:29:49,390 --> 00:29:51,459 if the person who linked 837 00:29:51,460 --> 00:29:53,709 to the infringing content had knowledge 838 00:29:53,710 --> 00:29:55,149 that it was infringing. 839 00:29:55,150 --> 00:29:56,509 So what does that mean for those 840 00:29:56,510 --> 00:29:58,659 providers? Will they have to scan 841 00:29:58,660 --> 00:30:01,269 not just the content that users upload, 842 00:30:01,270 --> 00:30:03,519 but also the content on websites of 843 00:30:03,520 --> 00:30:06,189 the that the users link to 844 00:30:06,190 --> 00:30:09,219 possibly the content of websites 845 00:30:09,220 --> 00:30:11,379 that link to the websites that users 846 00:30:11,380 --> 00:30:12,380 link to? 847 00:30:12,910 --> 00:30:15,159 And will they have to scan users brains 848 00:30:15,160 --> 00:30:17,049 to find out whether they knew that this 849 00:30:17,050 --> 00:30:18,609 was a copyright infringement? 850 00:30:18,610 --> 00:30:21,309 So it's a very difficult 851 00:30:21,310 --> 00:30:23,229 technological challenge, I think. 852 00:30:23,230 --> 00:30:25,629 But at least you'll all be 853 00:30:25,630 --> 00:30:27,489 getting a lot of work from this. 854 00:30:29,680 --> 00:30:31,809 There's just one big problem 855 00:30:31,810 --> 00:30:32,859 with letting us plan. 856 00:30:32,860 --> 00:30:34,929 Aside from the kind of technological 857 00:30:34,930 --> 00:30:36,339 issues there are, there's a legal 858 00:30:36,340 --> 00:30:38,139 problem, and that is that this new 859 00:30:38,140 --> 00:30:40,269 proposal violates existing EU 860 00:30:40,270 --> 00:30:41,270 law. 861 00:30:42,100 --> 00:30:44,469 Remember the current notice and takedown 862 00:30:44,470 --> 00:30:46,449 procedure that I've told you about? 863 00:30:46,450 --> 00:30:48,609 It protects those providers and 864 00:30:48,610 --> 00:30:51,099 also other types of providers, 865 00:30:51,100 --> 00:30:53,229 such as Internet service providers and 866 00:30:53,230 --> 00:30:55,539 intermediaries from liability 867 00:30:55,540 --> 00:30:57,759 for the actions of their users. 868 00:30:57,760 --> 00:30:59,769 This is written in the E Commerce 869 00:30:59,770 --> 00:31:01,359 Directive, another piece of EU 870 00:31:01,360 --> 00:31:02,529 legislation. 871 00:31:02,530 --> 00:31:04,659 And this e-commerce directive 872 00:31:04,660 --> 00:31:06,939 includes what is called the safe harbor. 873 00:31:06,940 --> 00:31:09,009 And the safe harbor means as long as 874 00:31:09,010 --> 00:31:11,769 a. Provider takes down illegal content 875 00:31:11,770 --> 00:31:14,019 as soon as it gains actual 876 00:31:14,020 --> 00:31:16,089 knowledge about it, then they are fined. 877 00:31:16,090 --> 00:31:18,039 They're not liable for what the users are 878 00:31:18,040 --> 00:31:19,040 doing. 879 00:31:20,320 --> 00:31:21,999 So how does that fit? 880 00:31:22,000 --> 00:31:24,369 I mean, in the same law, it actually 881 00:31:24,370 --> 00:31:26,919 says explicitly that 882 00:31:26,920 --> 00:31:29,139 these intermediaries cannot 883 00:31:29,140 --> 00:31:31,389 be forced by law to scan 884 00:31:31,390 --> 00:31:33,009 everything that the users upload. 885 00:31:33,010 --> 00:31:34,689 They only have to do the notes and 886 00:31:34,690 --> 00:31:36,849 takedown. So how can the providers 887 00:31:36,850 --> 00:31:39,489 prevent the availability of specific 888 00:31:39,490 --> 00:31:42,069 works on their services without scanning 889 00:31:42,070 --> 00:31:43,929 everything that is uploaded? 890 00:31:43,930 --> 00:31:46,479 The commission's quite creative 891 00:31:46,480 --> 00:31:48,579 solution to this is 892 00:31:48,580 --> 00:31:50,619 that in the recital's of this new 893 00:31:50,620 --> 00:31:52,749 proposal and recitals are supposed 894 00:31:52,750 --> 00:31:54,879 to be explanations of a new 895 00:31:54,880 --> 00:31:57,189 law that don't change its content 896 00:31:57,190 --> 00:31:59,469 that much. In these recitals, they simply 897 00:31:59,470 --> 00:32:01,939 redefine what an intermediary 898 00:32:01,940 --> 00:32:04,179 health provider is under the e-commerce 899 00:32:04,180 --> 00:32:06,279 directive by saying that the 900 00:32:06,280 --> 00:32:08,289 safe harbor only applies to a host 901 00:32:08,290 --> 00:32:10,809 provider if they are not 902 00:32:10,810 --> 00:32:12,879 optimizing the presentation 903 00:32:12,880 --> 00:32:15,219 of the upload it works or promoting 904 00:32:15,220 --> 00:32:17,559 them, even by automated means. 905 00:32:17,560 --> 00:32:19,809 So that means that Wikipedia or GitHub, 906 00:32:19,810 --> 00:32:21,939 who are actually presenting the uploaded 907 00:32:21,940 --> 00:32:24,549 content in a meaningful way, providing 908 00:32:24,550 --> 00:32:26,769 search functions, providing articles 909 00:32:26,770 --> 00:32:28,899 of the week, etc., they 910 00:32:28,900 --> 00:32:30,729 would no longer fall under the safe 911 00:32:30,730 --> 00:32:32,889 harbor and would be directly liable for 912 00:32:32,890 --> 00:32:35,289 any copyright infringement by the user. 913 00:32:35,290 --> 00:32:37,419 But Megaupload, which doesn't 914 00:32:37,420 --> 00:32:39,369 provide a search function where people 915 00:32:39,370 --> 00:32:41,169 are just dumping their files and can link 916 00:32:41,170 --> 00:32:43,269 to it, they would still be covered by 917 00:32:43,270 --> 00:32:44,739 the safe harbor. 918 00:32:44,740 --> 00:32:45,849 Makes a lot of sense. 919 00:32:49,240 --> 00:32:51,399 However, I think there is a chance that 920 00:32:51,400 --> 00:32:54,249 even if this law is passed, 921 00:32:54,250 --> 00:32:56,349 that this won't work out because the 922 00:32:56,350 --> 00:32:58,539 Court of Justice of the EU 923 00:32:58,540 --> 00:33:00,879 has in the past not only ruled 924 00:33:00,880 --> 00:33:02,949 that putting such an obligation on a 925 00:33:02,950 --> 00:33:05,469 service provider to scan for copyright 926 00:33:05,470 --> 00:33:07,599 infringement doesn't just violate 927 00:33:07,600 --> 00:33:09,909 the E Commerce Directive, it violates 928 00:33:09,910 --> 00:33:12,279 the fundamental rights to privacy, 929 00:33:12,280 --> 00:33:14,469 to freedom of speech, to freedom of 930 00:33:14,470 --> 00:33:16,239 information, and to the freedom to 931 00:33:16,240 --> 00:33:17,240 conduct the business. 932 00:33:18,700 --> 00:33:20,799 So we'll see how that 933 00:33:20,800 --> 00:33:22,929 works out in practice, but I wouldn't 934 00:33:22,930 --> 00:33:25,269 recommend to just wait until 935 00:33:25,270 --> 00:33:27,159 the European Court of Justice rules on 936 00:33:27,160 --> 00:33:28,749 this law because that could take many 937 00:33:28,750 --> 00:33:30,909 years. And the damage to the 938 00:33:30,910 --> 00:33:33,369 Internet ecosystem in the meantime 939 00:33:33,370 --> 00:33:35,089 could be quite significant. 940 00:33:35,090 --> 00:33:37,269 Finally, there is 941 00:33:37,270 --> 00:33:39,609 this proposal on text and data 942 00:33:39,610 --> 00:33:41,739 mining exception, which is also 943 00:33:41,740 --> 00:33:44,139 part of this proposal that most people 944 00:33:44,140 --> 00:33:45,759 would think this is a good thing. 945 00:33:45,760 --> 00:33:47,709 There is a new exception to copyright, so 946 00:33:47,710 --> 00:33:49,839 there are some more flexibility at it. 947 00:33:49,840 --> 00:33:51,699 But there is a problem with this because 948 00:33:51,700 --> 00:33:53,919 text and data mining so far has been 949 00:33:53,920 --> 00:33:55,629 more or less a legal gray zone. 950 00:33:55,630 --> 00:33:57,549 It's the question of whether or not you 951 00:33:57,550 --> 00:33:59,979 can copyright material that you already 952 00:33:59,980 --> 00:34:02,049 have legal access to for the purposes of 953 00:34:02,050 --> 00:34:03,069 data mining. 954 00:34:03,070 --> 00:34:05,439 So, for example, researchers 955 00:34:05,440 --> 00:34:08,198 who analyzed the vocabulary 956 00:34:08,199 --> 00:34:10,238 in Agatha Christie novels had to take 957 00:34:10,239 --> 00:34:13,089 copies of all the novels 958 00:34:13,090 --> 00:34:15,309 to find out whether the author developed 959 00:34:15,310 --> 00:34:17,229 Alzheimer's disease over the course of 960 00:34:17,230 --> 00:34:19,178 her life by seeing how broad the 961 00:34:19,179 --> 00:34:20,619 vocabulary was. 962 00:34:20,620 --> 00:34:23,079 Now, the thing here is that theoretically 963 00:34:23,080 --> 00:34:24,638 it's perfectly possible to do this 964 00:34:24,639 --> 00:34:25,899 without making copies. 965 00:34:25,900 --> 00:34:28,029 You just have to sit down and basically 966 00:34:28,030 --> 00:34:29,439 do the counting manually. 967 00:34:29,440 --> 00:34:31,509 But of course, this is really inefficient 968 00:34:31,510 --> 00:34:33,789 and especially in research, text 969 00:34:33,790 --> 00:34:35,649 and data mining is just becoming 970 00:34:35,650 --> 00:34:37,959 increasingly something that researchers 971 00:34:37,960 --> 00:34:40,178 want to do to make their research more 972 00:34:40,179 --> 00:34:40,928 efficient. 973 00:34:40,929 --> 00:34:42,908 And they were actually the ones who asked 974 00:34:42,909 --> 00:34:45,339 the European Commission for clarification 975 00:34:45,340 --> 00:34:47,408 that this kind of copying is not 976 00:34:47,409 --> 00:34:49,629 a copyright infringement by introducing 977 00:34:49,630 --> 00:34:51,789 such a text and data mining exception. 978 00:34:51,790 --> 00:34:54,939 And the main reason was to stop 979 00:34:54,940 --> 00:34:57,129 academic publishers from bullying them 980 00:34:57,130 --> 00:34:58,749 and saying, no, you can't download these 981 00:34:58,750 --> 00:35:00,279 articles for text and data mining. 982 00:35:00,280 --> 00:35:02,139 You need a license for that. 983 00:35:02,140 --> 00:35:04,689 The commission proposed an explicit 984 00:35:04,690 --> 00:35:06,369 exception for text and data mining. 985 00:35:06,370 --> 00:35:08,409 That's good. But unfortunately, in this 986 00:35:08,410 --> 00:35:10,779 proposal, it only applies to research 987 00:35:10,780 --> 00:35:12,099 organizations. 988 00:35:12,100 --> 00:35:13,659 The problem with that is if they're 989 00:35:13,660 --> 00:35:15,819 explicitly allowed the research 990 00:35:15,820 --> 00:35:18,159 organizations, it may follow 991 00:35:18,160 --> 00:35:20,499 or a judge may argue that individuals 992 00:35:20,500 --> 00:35:22,419 or companies who want to do text and data 993 00:35:22,420 --> 00:35:24,909 mining are then explicitly forbidden. 994 00:35:24,910 --> 00:35:26,679 And that would mean that individuals or 995 00:35:26,680 --> 00:35:28,899 companies training their artificial 996 00:35:28,900 --> 00:35:30,669 intelligence with stuff they find on the 997 00:35:30,670 --> 00:35:33,099 Internet may run afoul of copyright 998 00:35:33,100 --> 00:35:34,059 law. 999 00:35:34,060 --> 00:35:36,309 Also, there's not really 1000 00:35:36,310 --> 00:35:38,379 much movement on bringing an 1001 00:35:38,380 --> 00:35:39,459 end to geo blocking. 1002 00:35:39,460 --> 00:35:41,229 So this video is not available in your 1003 00:35:41,230 --> 00:35:43,029 country and messages like that, even 1004 00:35:43,030 --> 00:35:45,159 though the commission two years ago said 1005 00:35:45,160 --> 00:35:47,079 that it was a priority to get rid of 1006 00:35:47,080 --> 00:35:49,179 that. So that is by and large what 1007 00:35:49,180 --> 00:35:50,829 we have in this new proposal. 1008 00:35:50,830 --> 00:35:53,199 So you may wonder, OK, how could it be 1009 00:35:53,200 --> 00:35:54,939 that two years ago the commission said 1010 00:35:54,940 --> 00:35:56,709 we're going to make everything easier, 1011 00:35:56,710 --> 00:35:59,019 we're making it simpler, we 1012 00:35:59,020 --> 00:36:01,329 want to unleash Europe's 1013 00:36:01,330 --> 00:36:02,379 digital potential. 1014 00:36:02,380 --> 00:36:03,969 So how did we end up with this? 1015 00:36:05,740 --> 00:36:08,259 The easiest explanation for that is 1016 00:36:08,260 --> 00:36:10,419 that this copyright reform was hijacked 1017 00:36:10,420 --> 00:36:12,249 by a number of powerful industry 1018 00:36:12,250 --> 00:36:13,149 interests. 1019 00:36:13,150 --> 00:36:14,529 This is a picture of Commissioner 1020 00:36:14,530 --> 00:36:17,379 Attinger with a number of lobbyists. 1021 00:36:17,380 --> 00:36:19,989 Axel Springer is one of the publishers 1022 00:36:19,990 --> 00:36:22,449 who first lobbied for the license 1023 00:36:22,450 --> 00:36:24,579 in Germany and is now behind the lobbying 1024 00:36:24,580 --> 00:36:26,919 effort for the extra copyright 1025 00:36:26,920 --> 00:36:29,049 for publishers on a European level. 1026 00:36:29,050 --> 00:36:31,209 So they get a tool against Google and 1027 00:36:31,210 --> 00:36:33,639 Facebook, the German collecting society. 1028 00:36:33,640 --> 00:36:35,259 Gama'a, that could never agree with 1029 00:36:35,260 --> 00:36:37,419 YouTube on a deal to get something to 1030 00:36:37,420 --> 00:36:39,729 pressure YouTube into making a licensing 1031 00:36:39,730 --> 00:36:41,949 agreement. And the film industry got 1032 00:36:41,950 --> 00:36:44,139 spared from a ban on geo blocking, which 1033 00:36:44,140 --> 00:36:46,239 they continue to want to do. 1034 00:36:46,240 --> 00:36:48,399 So this reform is clearly 1035 00:36:48,400 --> 00:36:50,619 not about how to make copyright fit 1036 00:36:50,620 --> 00:36:52,689 for the digital age or how 1037 00:36:52,690 --> 00:36:54,939 to use technology's potential to create 1038 00:36:54,940 --> 00:36:56,949 new business models that actually work 1039 00:36:56,950 --> 00:36:58,089 with the Internet. 1040 00:36:58,090 --> 00:37:00,399 Instead, it's about how can we change 1041 00:37:00,400 --> 00:37:02,589 the Internet so the old media companies 1042 00:37:02,590 --> 00:37:03,909 don't have to. 1043 00:37:03,910 --> 00:37:05,979 And how can we subsidize our 1044 00:37:05,980 --> 00:37:08,079 European cultural industries with the 1045 00:37:08,080 --> 00:37:10,869 profits of American technology companies 1046 00:37:10,870 --> 00:37:12,939 and to basic building 1047 00:37:12,940 --> 00:37:14,919 blocks of the Internet are attacked by 1048 00:37:14,920 --> 00:37:15,909 this proposal. 1049 00:37:15,910 --> 00:37:18,069 The freedom to link and share news on the 1050 00:37:18,070 --> 00:37:20,619 Internet is fundamental 1051 00:37:20,620 --> 00:37:22,659 for the freedom of speech online. 1052 00:37:22,660 --> 00:37:24,729 We are seeing with a monitoring 1053 00:37:24,730 --> 00:37:26,889 obligation of privatization of law 1054 00:37:26,890 --> 00:37:29,649 enforcement, where the takedown 1055 00:37:29,650 --> 00:37:31,719 of illegal material will no longer 1056 00:37:31,720 --> 00:37:33,879 be done on the basis of court orders, 1057 00:37:33,880 --> 00:37:35,409 but by private companies who will 1058 00:37:35,410 --> 00:37:37,539 probably air on the side of caution 1059 00:37:37,540 --> 00:37:39,309 and take down more than they actually 1060 00:37:39,310 --> 00:37:40,209 have to. 1061 00:37:40,210 --> 00:37:42,279 It will probably keep 1062 00:37:42,280 --> 00:37:44,499 startups and smaller Internet companies 1063 00:37:44,500 --> 00:37:47,049 small and actually ensure the position 1064 00:37:47,050 --> 00:37:49,239 of the large multinational companies 1065 00:37:49,240 --> 00:37:51,399 that this proposal is supposedly 1066 00:37:51,400 --> 00:37:52,389 targeting. 1067 00:37:52,390 --> 00:37:54,519 And at the end of the 1068 00:37:54,520 --> 00:37:56,469 day, only companies like Google or 1069 00:37:56,470 --> 00:37:58,899 Facebook can actually afford the content 1070 00:37:58,900 --> 00:38:00,639 recognition technologies that would be 1071 00:38:00,640 --> 00:38:02,799 required to comply with this law. 1072 00:38:02,800 --> 00:38:04,569 And they can probably even count on 1073 00:38:04,570 --> 00:38:07,119 getting a free license for using 1074 00:38:07,120 --> 00:38:09,309 new snippets from publishers because of 1075 00:38:09,310 --> 00:38:10,869 all the traffic that they're actually 1076 00:38:10,870 --> 00:38:13,059 sending to the publishers websites 1077 00:38:13,060 --> 00:38:14,919 in this proposal, no attention is 1078 00:38:14,920 --> 00:38:17,409 actually paid to noncommercial projects 1079 00:38:17,410 --> 00:38:19,859 or. Open licenses and the interests 1080 00:38:19,860 --> 00:38:22,109 of individual users. 1081 00:38:22,110 --> 00:38:24,179 The problem is that 1082 00:38:24,180 --> 00:38:26,489 this will not work for anybody. 1083 00:38:26,490 --> 00:38:28,949 The protectionism of these past 1084 00:38:28,950 --> 00:38:31,049 business models won't actually save 1085 00:38:31,050 --> 00:38:33,059 these industries from having to change 1086 00:38:33,060 --> 00:38:34,469 and go with the times. 1087 00:38:34,470 --> 00:38:36,449 And I'm afraid that at the end of the 1088 00:38:36,450 --> 00:38:38,789 day, these measures will end up hurting 1089 00:38:38,790 --> 00:38:40,469 those who promote them today. 1090 00:38:40,470 --> 00:38:42,719 So if you look, for example, at 1091 00:38:42,720 --> 00:38:45,569 the effects of this right for publishers, 1092 00:38:45,570 --> 00:38:47,759 probably people will not start 1093 00:38:47,760 --> 00:38:50,009 paying them, but rather link to 1094 00:38:50,010 --> 00:38:52,109 websites that do not require this 1095 00:38:52,110 --> 00:38:54,179 sort of thing. So for the EU based 1096 00:38:54,180 --> 00:38:55,859 publishers who are asking for this, it 1097 00:38:55,860 --> 00:38:58,049 would probably mean fewer readers and 1098 00:38:58,050 --> 00:38:59,639 less revenue. 1099 00:38:59,640 --> 00:39:01,919 It probably won't be a problem for 1100 00:39:01,920 --> 00:39:04,199 any of the misinformation or propaganda 1101 00:39:04,200 --> 00:39:06,149 sites who are getting their funding from 1102 00:39:06,150 --> 00:39:08,339 different ways and whose main purpose 1103 00:39:08,340 --> 00:39:10,079 is to be spread as far and wide as 1104 00:39:10,080 --> 00:39:12,239 possible. I think copyright law is 1105 00:39:12,240 --> 00:39:14,309 fundamentally the wrong tool 1106 00:39:14,310 --> 00:39:16,559 to stop or to shape 1107 00:39:16,560 --> 00:39:18,689 this technological and structural change 1108 00:39:18,690 --> 00:39:20,879 that we're seeing in the media industry. 1109 00:39:20,880 --> 00:39:23,009 So it's now up to us to do 1110 00:39:23,010 --> 00:39:24,449 something about this. 1111 00:39:24,450 --> 00:39:26,729 And I think that actually there 1112 00:39:26,730 --> 00:39:28,919 is hope. There is, especially 1113 00:39:28,920 --> 00:39:31,169 when it comes to this new 1114 00:39:31,170 --> 00:39:32,789 proposal neighboring right. 1115 00:39:32,790 --> 00:39:35,069 For publishers, because it's already 1116 00:39:35,070 --> 00:39:37,349 relatively unpopular in the European 1117 00:39:37,350 --> 00:39:38,339 Parliament. 1118 00:39:38,340 --> 00:39:40,559 The European Parliament has already voted 1119 00:39:40,560 --> 00:39:43,049 against such ideas in the past 1120 00:39:43,050 --> 00:39:44,789 when it made its recommendations. 1121 00:39:44,790 --> 00:39:47,009 And there is by now a pretty large 1122 00:39:47,010 --> 00:39:48,629 group of members of the European 1123 00:39:48,630 --> 00:39:50,429 Parliament from across the political 1124 00:39:50,430 --> 00:39:52,619 spectrum who are pledging that they 1125 00:39:52,620 --> 00:39:55,259 want to save your right to link. 1126 00:39:55,260 --> 00:39:57,579 And I think it's important, 1127 00:39:57,580 --> 00:39:59,669 though, first of all, to support them 1128 00:39:59,670 --> 00:40:02,339 publicly, I think we're always, 1129 00:40:02,340 --> 00:40:04,619 well, pointing out when a politician 1130 00:40:04,620 --> 00:40:06,479 is doing something wrong and sometimes 1131 00:40:06,480 --> 00:40:08,759 these people are going against their own 1132 00:40:08,760 --> 00:40:10,529 party line and saying this is something 1133 00:40:10,530 --> 00:40:12,329 that is just not going to work. 1134 00:40:12,330 --> 00:40:14,219 And also, these members of parliaments 1135 00:40:14,220 --> 00:40:16,529 need to be made aware of 1136 00:40:16,530 --> 00:40:19,589 the dangerous court rulings that are 1137 00:40:19,590 --> 00:40:21,749 actually making linking a copyright 1138 00:40:21,750 --> 00:40:22,769 infringement itself. 1139 00:40:22,770 --> 00:40:24,149 And this is something that we could 1140 00:40:24,150 --> 00:40:26,219 actually fix through a change of 1141 00:40:26,220 --> 00:40:27,989 copyright law. 1142 00:40:27,990 --> 00:40:30,509 When civil society organization 1143 00:40:30,510 --> 00:40:32,939 Open Media has started a campaign save, 1144 00:40:32,940 --> 00:40:35,249 save a campaign page, save 1145 00:40:35,250 --> 00:40:37,559 the link dot org, where you can write 1146 00:40:37,560 --> 00:40:39,509 to members of parliament or just get 1147 00:40:39,510 --> 00:40:42,059 informed about the topic at large. 1148 00:40:42,060 --> 00:40:44,159 And I've 1149 00:40:44,160 --> 00:40:45,989 also written about it extensively. 1150 00:40:45,990 --> 00:40:47,609 I've just published a blog post where 1151 00:40:47,610 --> 00:40:49,739 these 10 things that the EU Commission 1152 00:40:49,740 --> 00:40:51,599 wants to make illegal. 1153 00:40:51,600 --> 00:40:53,939 It's great if you if you spread 1154 00:40:53,940 --> 00:40:56,279 this news, it's actually quite easy 1155 00:40:56,280 --> 00:40:58,469 to contact your own representatives in 1156 00:40:58,470 --> 00:41:00,209 the European Parliament because they do 1157 00:41:00,210 --> 00:41:02,459 not get contacted all the time. 1158 00:41:02,460 --> 00:41:04,439 When the parliament is in session, you 1159 00:41:04,440 --> 00:41:05,939 actually have a good chance of simply 1160 00:41:05,940 --> 00:41:07,379 getting them on the phone. 1161 00:41:07,380 --> 00:41:09,599 And the debate about this proposal in 1162 00:41:09,600 --> 00:41:11,759 the national public is also dearly 1163 00:41:11,760 --> 00:41:13,739 needed, because at the end of the day, 1164 00:41:13,740 --> 00:41:15,059 the council where the national 1165 00:41:15,060 --> 00:41:17,249 governments, it will have just as much 1166 00:41:17,250 --> 00:41:19,139 influence over where this copyright 1167 00:41:19,140 --> 00:41:21,479 proposal is going to go as the European 1168 00:41:21,480 --> 00:41:22,619 Parliament has. 1169 00:41:22,620 --> 00:41:24,869 And finally, if you yourself have 1170 00:41:24,870 --> 00:41:26,519 heard something in this talk where you 1171 00:41:26,520 --> 00:41:28,919 feel this is going to affect me directly, 1172 00:41:28,920 --> 00:41:30,959 for example, if you run a file holster or 1173 00:41:30,960 --> 00:41:33,209 discussion forum and you think it may 1174 00:41:33,210 --> 00:41:35,279 fall under this definition, talk 1175 00:41:35,280 --> 00:41:37,259 about it and talk about whether or not 1176 00:41:37,260 --> 00:41:39,749 it's possible for you to actually comply 1177 00:41:39,750 --> 00:41:42,269 with this law and write about it and 1178 00:41:42,270 --> 00:41:44,249 spread the news to other people. 1179 00:41:44,250 --> 00:41:46,469 Finally, you can also contact 1180 00:41:46,470 --> 00:41:48,569 me directly if you want to join the fight 1181 00:41:48,570 --> 00:41:50,159 against these proposals. 1182 00:41:50,160 --> 00:41:52,439 And I hope that over the 1183 00:41:52,440 --> 00:41:54,329 course of the next year, we'll be able to 1184 00:41:54,330 --> 00:41:56,549 beat these proposals and can hopefully 1185 00:41:56,550 --> 00:41:58,619 go back to the urgent task 1186 00:41:58,620 --> 00:42:01,079 of actually making copyright law easier 1187 00:42:01,080 --> 00:42:03,029 and saner for everybody. 1188 00:42:03,030 --> 00:42:06,329 I wish you all a great New Year 2017, 1189 00:42:06,330 --> 00:42:08,429 and I hope you remember it's up 1190 00:42:08,430 --> 00:42:10,379 to all of us to make sure that it's 1191 00:42:10,380 --> 00:42:11,519 better than the last one. 1192 00:42:11,520 --> 00:42:12,520 Thank you. 1193 00:42:29,380 --> 00:42:32,529 So we have time for questions 1194 00:42:32,530 --> 00:42:34,599 and please queue up at 1195 00:42:34,600 --> 00:42:36,759 the microphones we've spread out 1196 00:42:36,760 --> 00:42:38,919 throughout the hall and we start with our 1197 00:42:38,920 --> 00:42:41,109 signal angel question 1198 00:42:41,110 --> 00:42:43,049 from the Internet, please. 1199 00:42:43,050 --> 00:42:45,369 This BitTorrent file or magnetic 1200 00:42:45,370 --> 00:42:47,519 link count is an illegal 1201 00:42:47,520 --> 00:42:49,959 illegal content since it's technically 1202 00:42:49,960 --> 00:42:52,299 impossible to verify the content 1203 00:42:52,300 --> 00:42:53,619 without downloading it. 1204 00:42:55,210 --> 00:42:57,189 I think it's a bit tricky. 1205 00:42:57,190 --> 00:42:59,559 There have been court rulings in the past 1206 00:42:59,560 --> 00:43:01,629 that argued that 1207 00:43:01,630 --> 00:43:04,239 the websites, 1208 00:43:04,240 --> 00:43:06,459 the Pirate Bay was at least had 1209 00:43:06,460 --> 00:43:08,329 a so-called accessory liability. 1210 00:43:08,330 --> 00:43:09,819 So there are different ways you can be 1211 00:43:09,820 --> 00:43:12,039 liable. You can be liable simply 1212 00:43:12,040 --> 00:43:14,019 because you have committed a copyright 1213 00:43:14,020 --> 00:43:16,689 infringement. And this is what this new 1214 00:43:16,690 --> 00:43:18,249 question of whether linking is a 1215 00:43:18,250 --> 00:43:20,469 copyright infringement or not is about. 1216 00:43:20,470 --> 00:43:22,299 But you can also have an accessory 1217 00:43:22,300 --> 00:43:24,699 liability where a court can prove 1218 00:43:24,700 --> 00:43:27,069 that you aided and abetted 1219 00:43:27,070 --> 00:43:28,779 the copyright infringement of somebody 1220 00:43:28,780 --> 00:43:31,029 else. So even if technically 1221 00:43:31,030 --> 00:43:33,339 this link would not be a copyright 1222 00:43:33,340 --> 00:43:35,619 infringement, it's still possible that 1223 00:43:35,620 --> 00:43:37,389 you, as the person running the website, 1224 00:43:37,390 --> 00:43:38,610 would be liable for it. 1225 00:43:40,540 --> 00:43:42,759 So and next, please, 1226 00:43:42,760 --> 00:43:44,409 microphone three. 1227 00:43:47,590 --> 00:43:50,259 Yeah, I am a question I know 1228 00:43:50,260 --> 00:43:52,419 as far as I know in education, there will 1229 00:43:52,420 --> 00:43:54,459 be no exception for education, so will 1230 00:43:54,460 --> 00:43:55,869 still be difficult for teachers and 1231 00:43:55,870 --> 00:43:57,699 everyone to share this material. 1232 00:43:57,700 --> 00:43:59,469 And the question my question would be 1233 00:43:59,470 --> 00:44:02,049 whether this is also discussed within 1234 00:44:02,050 --> 00:44:04,119 within the revision project 1235 00:44:04,120 --> 00:44:06,009 and maybe you can give some insights on 1236 00:44:06,010 --> 00:44:07,010 that. 1237 00:44:07,360 --> 00:44:09,879 There is one exception that applies 1238 00:44:09,880 --> 00:44:12,279 to education that is in the proposal. 1239 00:44:12,280 --> 00:44:14,319 I have not mentioned it because it's not 1240 00:44:14,320 --> 00:44:16,959 really clearly good or bad. 1241 00:44:16,960 --> 00:44:19,209 What this proposal does is it says 1242 00:44:19,210 --> 00:44:21,519 that it will be mandatory for every 1243 00:44:21,520 --> 00:44:23,829 member state in the EU to 1244 00:44:23,830 --> 00:44:26,020 allow the use of 1245 00:44:27,360 --> 00:44:30,729 of different copyrighted content 1246 00:44:30,730 --> 00:44:32,799 for digital teaching activity. 1247 00:44:32,800 --> 00:44:35,469 So, for example, if you are 1248 00:44:35,470 --> 00:44:37,689 using some kind of online service 1249 00:44:37,690 --> 00:44:40,299 for for students to download 1250 00:44:40,300 --> 00:44:42,219 texts or if you're a live streaming your 1251 00:44:42,220 --> 00:44:44,559 lectures to students in other countries. 1252 00:44:44,560 --> 00:44:46,779 However, there are two caveats with 1253 00:44:46,780 --> 00:44:48,849 this. One is that the member states 1254 00:44:48,850 --> 00:44:51,009 can decide for themselves whether 1255 00:44:51,010 --> 00:44:53,229 or not there is a compensation for this. 1256 00:44:53,230 --> 00:44:55,479 And for example, in Germany, 1257 00:44:55,480 --> 00:44:57,459 there is an exception for education. 1258 00:44:57,460 --> 00:44:59,619 However, it hasn't really worked recently 1259 00:44:59,620 --> 00:45:02,020 because the 1260 00:45:03,400 --> 00:45:05,589 compensation, 1261 00:45:05,590 --> 00:45:07,869 the the collecting society that 1262 00:45:07,870 --> 00:45:09,999 is responsible for collecting the 1263 00:45:10,000 --> 00:45:12,429 compensation, this guy is waving 1264 00:45:12,430 --> 00:45:15,199 at, you know, 1265 00:45:15,200 --> 00:45:17,439 the money that the collecting society 1266 00:45:17,440 --> 00:45:19,239 is collecting. They have gained a court 1267 00:45:19,240 --> 00:45:21,549 ruling that said that the 1268 00:45:21,550 --> 00:45:23,889 universities actually have to tell them 1269 00:45:23,890 --> 00:45:26,019 who exactly 1270 00:45:26,020 --> 00:45:28,149 or how many times a particular 1271 00:45:28,150 --> 00:45:29,569 work has been used and so on. 1272 00:45:29,570 --> 00:45:32,049 So the bureaucratic effort is so large 1273 00:45:32,050 --> 00:45:33,639 that because of the compensation 1274 00:45:33,640 --> 00:45:35,439 requirement, it hasn't really worked very 1275 00:45:35,440 --> 00:45:37,059 well. That's one problem. 1276 00:45:37,060 --> 00:45:39,309 The other problem is that this proposal 1277 00:45:39,310 --> 00:45:41,409 also says that if there 1278 00:45:41,410 --> 00:45:43,929 are appropriate licenses available 1279 00:45:43,930 --> 00:45:46,209 on the market, then the member state 1280 00:45:46,210 --> 00:45:47,919 can decide that the exception doesn't 1281 00:45:47,920 --> 00:45:50,019 apply. And this is also something that 1282 00:45:50,020 --> 00:45:52,389 we know from the German context that 1283 00:45:52,390 --> 00:45:54,249 a publisher may say that there is an 1284 00:45:54,250 --> 00:45:56,169 appropriate license available, but it 1285 00:45:56,170 --> 00:45:58,929 actually is not really usable for 1286 00:45:58,930 --> 00:46:00,059 institutions. So 1287 00:46:01,550 --> 00:46:03,699 there is definitely an attempt 1288 00:46:03,700 --> 00:46:05,919 from different educational 1289 00:46:05,920 --> 00:46:08,499 organizations to improve this exception. 1290 00:46:08,500 --> 00:46:10,119 And I think the most important thing 1291 00:46:10,120 --> 00:46:12,459 would be to to address these two parts 1292 00:46:12,460 --> 00:46:14,739 and make sure that this exception 1293 00:46:14,740 --> 00:46:16,569 would actually apply in practice. 1294 00:46:16,570 --> 00:46:18,939 But in any case, it would not be the same 1295 00:46:18,940 --> 00:46:21,519 as a general education exception. 1296 00:46:21,520 --> 00:46:23,319 That applies also to what is happening 1297 00:46:23,320 --> 00:46:25,419 inside the classroom or what is happening 1298 00:46:25,420 --> 00:46:27,129 in informal education. 1299 00:46:27,130 --> 00:46:29,409 It's really only for digital users 1300 00:46:29,410 --> 00:46:31,149 because the commission says this is where 1301 00:46:31,150 --> 00:46:32,799 there is a cross-border problem. 1302 00:46:32,800 --> 00:46:34,929 So there's definitely a lot of room for 1303 00:46:34,930 --> 00:46:36,339 improvement when it comes to this 1304 00:46:36,340 --> 00:46:37,340 provision. 1305 00:46:39,250 --> 00:46:41,259 We go ahead with microphone number four 1306 00:46:41,260 --> 00:46:43,539 here and you have all 1307 00:46:43,540 --> 00:46:45,639 this history. It reminds me a lot what 1308 00:46:45,640 --> 00:46:48,009 we heard in Spain a couple years ago 1309 00:46:48,010 --> 00:46:50,199 when they pushed a law that basically 1310 00:46:50,200 --> 00:46:52,209 forced Google to pay newspapers for the 1311 00:46:52,210 --> 00:46:53,859 for the news linked. 1312 00:46:53,860 --> 00:46:56,019 And the result was that Google closed 1313 00:46:56,020 --> 00:46:57,609 Google News in Spain. 1314 00:46:57,610 --> 00:47:00,149 So I wonder if this 1315 00:47:00,150 --> 00:47:02,799 if this case made these people reconsider 1316 00:47:02,800 --> 00:47:04,779 some positions. 1317 00:47:04,780 --> 00:47:07,239 The people in the European Commission 1318 00:47:07,240 --> 00:47:09,759 who made this proposal know perfectly 1319 00:47:09,760 --> 00:47:12,069 well about the failure of the Spanish 1320 00:47:12,070 --> 00:47:13,959 law. And they know perfectly well about 1321 00:47:13,960 --> 00:47:16,029 the failure of the German law. 1322 00:47:16,030 --> 00:47:18,309 And they decided to do it anyway, 1323 00:47:18,310 --> 00:47:20,439 which they called an evidence based 1324 00:47:20,440 --> 00:47:21,440 approach. 1325 00:47:27,990 --> 00:47:29,819 The European Commission actually did a 1326 00:47:29,820 --> 00:47:32,219 public consultation where thousands 1327 00:47:32,220 --> 00:47:34,349 of people wrote to them and told them 1328 00:47:34,350 --> 00:47:36,539 what they think about this 1329 00:47:36,540 --> 00:47:38,429 question of a neighboring right for press 1330 00:47:38,430 --> 00:47:40,079 publishers. And there were actually a 1331 00:47:40,080 --> 00:47:42,659 number of Spanish publishers who said, 1332 00:47:42,660 --> 00:47:43,649 we changed our mind. 1333 00:47:43,650 --> 00:47:45,089 We don't want this anymore. 1334 00:47:45,090 --> 00:47:47,549 It has actually harmed us in Spain. 1335 00:47:47,550 --> 00:47:48,719 We're getting less traffic. 1336 00:47:48,720 --> 00:47:50,219 We're getting this ad revenue. 1337 00:47:50,220 --> 00:47:51,449 Please don't do this. 1338 00:47:51,450 --> 00:47:53,849 But the majority of publishers who wrote, 1339 00:47:53,850 --> 00:47:55,589 and I think most of them were German, 1340 00:47:55,590 --> 00:47:57,749 again, still were in favor 1341 00:47:57,750 --> 00:47:59,819 of this. So I think 1342 00:47:59,820 --> 00:48:02,159 it shows that it's really important to 1343 00:48:02,160 --> 00:48:04,739 to find also differing 1344 00:48:04,740 --> 00:48:06,599 voices among the rights holders. 1345 00:48:06,600 --> 00:48:08,789 It's not like every author thinks 1346 00:48:08,790 --> 00:48:10,739 that this kind of copyright law is a good 1347 00:48:10,740 --> 00:48:12,599 idea and probably not even every 1348 00:48:12,600 --> 00:48:14,729 publisher or any 1349 00:48:14,730 --> 00:48:16,119 rights holders organization. 1350 00:48:16,120 --> 00:48:18,449 So I think it's really important to 1351 00:48:18,450 --> 00:48:20,969 try to find these these different voices 1352 00:48:20,970 --> 00:48:23,159 and see that not everybody agrees 1353 00:48:23,160 --> 00:48:24,160 with this approach. 1354 00:48:25,470 --> 00:48:27,629 So we have a lot of questions queued 1355 00:48:27,630 --> 00:48:29,639 from the outside, so we take another from 1356 00:48:29,640 --> 00:48:30,840 the signal Angel, please. 1357 00:48:32,450 --> 00:48:34,579 How is this regulation relevant to 1358 00:48:34,580 --> 00:48:36,979 businesses not based in the EU, 1359 00:48:36,980 --> 00:48:40,219 but in the USA or in Russia? 1360 00:48:40,220 --> 00:48:42,329 That's a very complicated question. 1361 00:48:42,330 --> 00:48:44,419 So copyright law 1362 00:48:44,420 --> 00:48:46,849 is territorial, which means 1363 00:48:46,850 --> 00:48:49,429 that the copyright law applies 1364 00:48:49,430 --> 00:48:51,949 of the country in which the copyright 1365 00:48:51,950 --> 00:48:54,019 relevant act is taking place when it 1366 00:48:54,020 --> 00:48:55,519 comes to copying. 1367 00:48:55,520 --> 00:48:57,259 That's relatively easy. 1368 00:48:57,260 --> 00:48:59,209 If you're I don't know, you're at home 1369 00:48:59,210 --> 00:49:01,369 and you're making a copy and you live 1370 00:49:01,370 --> 00:49:03,049 in Germany, then German copyright law 1371 00:49:03,050 --> 00:49:04,879 applies. If you're making something 1372 00:49:04,880 --> 00:49:06,739 available on the Internet, it's a lot 1373 00:49:06,740 --> 00:49:08,779 more complicated and it's not actually 1374 00:49:08,780 --> 00:49:10,669 fully decided whether it's the country 1375 00:49:10,670 --> 00:49:13,219 where the server is hosted, 1376 00:49:13,220 --> 00:49:15,319 it's the country where the 1377 00:49:15,320 --> 00:49:17,329 website is legally established. 1378 00:49:17,330 --> 00:49:19,099 Or it could even be the country where the 1379 00:49:19,100 --> 00:49:20,599 user is located. 1380 00:49:20,600 --> 00:49:22,759 So this is one of the reasons 1381 00:49:22,760 --> 00:49:24,619 why you see geo blocking sometimes 1382 00:49:24,620 --> 00:49:26,779 because rights holder can actually 1383 00:49:26,780 --> 00:49:28,459 go to court in the country where the 1384 00:49:28,460 --> 00:49:30,049 content is available. 1385 00:49:30,050 --> 00:49:31,759 So if something is on the Internet, 1386 00:49:31,760 --> 00:49:33,679 that's pretty much every country. 1387 00:49:33,680 --> 00:49:35,899 And that's also one of the reasons 1388 00:49:35,900 --> 00:49:38,329 why we need a European copyright 1389 00:49:38,330 --> 00:49:39,979 instead of 28 different ones. 1390 00:49:39,980 --> 00:49:42,139 Because if you want to actually know 1391 00:49:42,140 --> 00:49:44,329 for sure that what you're doing is legal, 1392 00:49:44,330 --> 00:49:46,429 you pretty much have to have a doctorate 1393 00:49:46,430 --> 00:49:48,379 in copyright law and have studied all the 1394 00:49:48,380 --> 00:49:49,579 28 different laws. 1395 00:49:49,580 --> 00:49:51,409 And that's just for the European Union. 1396 00:49:53,860 --> 00:49:55,809 We'll go out with microphone number one 1397 00:49:55,810 --> 00:49:58,179 over here to elaborate on that, 1398 00:49:58,180 --> 00:50:00,579 would it help to escalate the situation, 1399 00:50:00,580 --> 00:50:02,649 for example, when we're talking 1400 00:50:02,650 --> 00:50:04,299 about our friends from the court in 1401 00:50:04,300 --> 00:50:06,399 Hamburg, we just have to look 1402 00:50:06,400 --> 00:50:08,799 at their decisions and 1403 00:50:08,800 --> 00:50:10,929 what they link to in their decisions and 1404 00:50:10,930 --> 00:50:13,029 declare it illegal in their 1405 00:50:13,030 --> 00:50:14,030 decisions 1406 00:50:15,310 --> 00:50:17,529 to have perhaps a means 1407 00:50:17,530 --> 00:50:19,569 to just tell them that they have a link 1408 00:50:19,570 --> 00:50:21,819 linking to an illegal film and 1409 00:50:21,820 --> 00:50:22,989 therefore they have to take it down or 1410 00:50:22,990 --> 00:50:24,789 they are responsible for it and then 1411 00:50:24,790 --> 00:50:26,859 escalated on a European level, just 1412 00:50:26,860 --> 00:50:28,389 the process. 1413 00:50:28,390 --> 00:50:30,579 Well, the the 1414 00:50:30,580 --> 00:50:32,949 court rulings themselves probably don't 1415 00:50:32,950 --> 00:50:34,869 have links as such. 1416 00:50:34,870 --> 00:50:37,239 They may have strings 1417 00:50:37,240 --> 00:50:39,519 of text that indicates the 1418 00:50:39,520 --> 00:50:41,709 location of URLs, but of course, that's 1419 00:50:41,710 --> 00:50:43,269 not the same thing as a link. 1420 00:50:43,270 --> 00:50:45,339 It's actually quite an interesting 1421 00:50:45,340 --> 00:50:47,259 philosophical distinction that if you can 1422 00:50:47,260 --> 00:50:48,999 click on it, it's a link. 1423 00:50:49,000 --> 00:50:51,069 If it's just the text, then, well, 1424 00:50:51,070 --> 00:50:52,479 I suppose it's not a link. 1425 00:50:52,480 --> 00:50:53,710 It's just the string of text 1426 00:50:55,120 --> 00:50:57,189 copy. Pasting a string and not having 1427 00:50:57,190 --> 00:50:58,689 the link directly would also be an 1428 00:50:58,690 --> 00:51:00,069 option. I don't know. 1429 00:51:00,070 --> 00:51:01,899 Sometimes I think that it's actually the 1430 00:51:01,900 --> 00:51:03,759 European Court of Justice that is trying 1431 00:51:03,760 --> 00:51:05,889 to hack the system by making laws 1432 00:51:05,890 --> 00:51:07,899 or making rulings that just make no sense 1433 00:51:07,900 --> 00:51:10,239 whatsoever that will force us 1434 00:51:10,240 --> 00:51:12,549 to reform the exclusive rights 1435 00:51:12,550 --> 00:51:14,289 that underlie the copyright law. 1436 00:51:14,290 --> 00:51:16,389 Because if a Lincoln can 1437 00:51:16,390 --> 00:51:18,369 be a communication to the public and 1438 00:51:18,370 --> 00:51:20,439 therefore a copyright relevant act, well, 1439 00:51:20,440 --> 00:51:23,019 then everybody is infringing on copyright 1440 00:51:23,020 --> 00:51:24,789 and maybe we need to change it at some 1441 00:51:24,790 --> 00:51:26,619 point. So I think you might have some 1442 00:51:26,620 --> 00:51:28,839 some friends at the European Court 1443 00:51:28,840 --> 00:51:30,939 of Justice who are hackers themselves. 1444 00:51:37,320 --> 00:51:39,719 We continue with microphone eight at 1445 00:51:39,720 --> 00:51:43,229 the left hand side top, please. 1446 00:51:43,230 --> 00:51:45,119 Well, chances are that the current 1447 00:51:45,120 --> 00:51:47,309 proposal has refused to start as close 1448 00:51:47,310 --> 00:51:49,469 kept. And if it is kept, 1449 00:51:49,470 --> 00:51:50,759 what do we do about it? 1450 00:51:50,760 --> 00:51:53,009 And again, so I'm not sure 1451 00:51:53,010 --> 00:51:55,409 that a rejection of the entire 1452 00:51:55,410 --> 00:51:57,539 proposal would be such a good idea, 1453 00:51:57,540 --> 00:51:59,279 because, for example, there is this 1454 00:51:59,280 --> 00:52:01,409 exemption for education that at 1455 00:52:01,410 --> 00:52:03,239 least if it's improved, could be a step 1456 00:52:03,240 --> 00:52:04,439 in the right direction. 1457 00:52:04,440 --> 00:52:06,159 There is also an exception. 1458 00:52:06,160 --> 00:52:08,249 Now, this is really revolutionary that 1459 00:52:08,250 --> 00:52:10,379 would allow libraries to make 1460 00:52:10,380 --> 00:52:12,449 copies of books that 1461 00:52:12,450 --> 00:52:13,679 they already have. 1462 00:52:15,990 --> 00:52:18,059 So I 1463 00:52:18,060 --> 00:52:20,189 don't actually want to reject the entire 1464 00:52:20,190 --> 00:52:22,379 thing. I think ideal would be to reject 1465 00:52:22,380 --> 00:52:24,719 the Article 11, which is this neighboring 1466 00:52:24,720 --> 00:52:26,819 right for publishers and the Article 1467 00:52:26,820 --> 00:52:29,219 13, which is the content monitoring 1468 00:52:29,220 --> 00:52:31,289 provision and the recitals that 1469 00:52:31,290 --> 00:52:33,359 are redefining what a host provider 1470 00:52:33,360 --> 00:52:35,459 is and then try to improve the other 1471 00:52:35,460 --> 00:52:35,939 parts. 1472 00:52:35,940 --> 00:52:37,919 And the way to do this is, of course, a 1473 00:52:37,920 --> 00:52:39,479 little bit more difficult than, for 1474 00:52:39,480 --> 00:52:41,819 example, with ACTA or SOPA and PIPA, 1475 00:52:41,820 --> 00:52:43,439 where you could simply go to the streets 1476 00:52:43,440 --> 00:52:45,899 and say, reject this entire thing. 1477 00:52:45,900 --> 00:52:47,849 I think if it stayed the way it is, then 1478 00:52:47,850 --> 00:52:48,809 we should reject it. 1479 00:52:48,810 --> 00:52:51,119 Then it's doing more harm than good. 1480 00:52:51,120 --> 00:52:53,249 But we actually have a number of 1481 00:52:53,250 --> 00:52:54,899 people working on it in the European 1482 00:52:54,900 --> 00:52:57,119 Parliament who are relatively 1483 00:52:57,120 --> 00:52:58,469 sensible. 1484 00:52:58,470 --> 00:53:00,569 The rapporteur for this proposal 1485 00:53:00,570 --> 00:53:02,789 is a member of the European People's 1486 00:53:02,790 --> 00:53:05,069 Party, the conservatives, and 1487 00:53:05,070 --> 00:53:06,069 she's from Malta. 1488 00:53:06,070 --> 00:53:07,949 Her name is Threescore Mordini, and she 1489 00:53:07,950 --> 00:53:10,289 has actually promised to meet every 1490 00:53:10,290 --> 00:53:12,599 single stakeholder who asks for a meeting 1491 00:53:12,600 --> 00:53:14,069 with her and is willing to come to 1492 00:53:14,070 --> 00:53:16,349 Brussels. So if you are 1493 00:53:16,350 --> 00:53:18,269 feeling like a lobbyist today, you could 1494 00:53:18,270 --> 00:53:20,549 also try and explain this 1495 00:53:20,550 --> 00:53:22,739 to her. And my impression of her has been 1496 00:53:22,740 --> 00:53:24,869 that she at least tries to understand 1497 00:53:24,870 --> 00:53:26,969 how this stuff works technologically and 1498 00:53:26,970 --> 00:53:28,649 tries to find a solution that works for 1499 00:53:28,650 --> 00:53:30,749 everybody. So I think what we need to do 1500 00:53:30,750 --> 00:53:33,029 now is really start a public debate 1501 00:53:33,030 --> 00:53:34,769 about these things, and especially when 1502 00:53:34,770 --> 00:53:36,209 it comes to the neighboring right. 1503 00:53:36,210 --> 00:53:37,829 The debate has already changed 1504 00:53:37,830 --> 00:53:38,879 considerably. 1505 00:53:38,880 --> 00:53:41,069 When this was being discussed in Germany 1506 00:53:41,070 --> 00:53:43,229 a few years ago, the 1507 00:53:43,230 --> 00:53:45,719 publishers were basically 1508 00:53:45,720 --> 00:53:46,619 having a field day. 1509 00:53:46,620 --> 00:53:48,419 All the media were writing that this is a 1510 00:53:48,420 --> 00:53:50,129 great thing. This is very different 1511 00:53:50,130 --> 00:53:51,899 today. You have a lot of especially 1512 00:53:51,900 --> 00:53:54,539 online journalists who are writing 1513 00:53:54,540 --> 00:53:56,609 against the best interests of their 1514 00:53:56,610 --> 00:53:58,259 publishers, as they should. 1515 00:53:58,260 --> 00:54:00,419 And so you can see 1516 00:54:00,420 --> 00:54:02,519 that that there is a way 1517 00:54:02,520 --> 00:54:04,619 of addressing this and making it a public 1518 00:54:04,620 --> 00:54:06,569 issue. And if we do that, then I think 1519 00:54:06,570 --> 00:54:08,039 it's possible to delete these two 1520 00:54:08,040 --> 00:54:10,589 proposals and make sure that the rest 1521 00:54:10,590 --> 00:54:12,629 of the proposal actually gets turned into 1522 00:54:12,630 --> 00:54:14,699 something meaningful and something that 1523 00:54:14,700 --> 00:54:16,380 will make the situation better. 1524 00:54:17,520 --> 00:54:19,769 We continue with microphone number two in 1525 00:54:19,770 --> 00:54:20,739 different things. 1526 00:54:20,740 --> 00:54:23,489 Yulia, Julia, excellent talk so far. 1527 00:54:23,490 --> 00:54:25,589 What if I even follow all these 1528 00:54:25,590 --> 00:54:27,389 rules and check the link and everything's 1529 00:54:27,390 --> 00:54:29,339 fine, then publish it. 1530 00:54:29,340 --> 00:54:31,539 And as a sudden, the content behind 1531 00:54:31,540 --> 00:54:33,629 the link changes and it has a 1532 00:54:33,630 --> 00:54:35,849 copyright conflict. 1533 00:54:35,850 --> 00:54:37,320 Do I still get into jail? 1534 00:54:38,340 --> 00:54:41,099 So the European Court of Justice says 1535 00:54:41,100 --> 00:54:43,259 if you're a commercial provider, there's 1536 00:54:43,260 --> 00:54:45,389 a rebuttal, a rebuttable 1537 00:54:45,390 --> 00:54:47,669 assumption that you knew the content was 1538 00:54:47,670 --> 00:54:49,889 illegal. So if you can prove, for 1539 00:54:49,890 --> 00:54:52,289 example, that you haven't click the link 1540 00:54:52,290 --> 00:54:54,089 since the content was changed or 1541 00:54:54,090 --> 00:54:55,529 something like that, for example, your 1542 00:54:55,530 --> 00:54:57,659 website has been completely static since 1543 00:54:57,660 --> 00:55:00,029 then. Then maybe you can get out of it. 1544 00:55:00,030 --> 00:55:01,769 But generally, if it's a commercial 1545 00:55:01,770 --> 00:55:03,659 website and you're linking to it, then 1546 00:55:03,660 --> 00:55:05,879 the assumption is that you knew about 1547 00:55:05,880 --> 00:55:08,159 it and you're liable unless you can prove 1548 00:55:08,160 --> 00:55:09,160 the opposite. 1549 00:55:10,610 --> 00:55:11,969 We can hack this, but 1550 00:55:13,010 --> 00:55:14,989 so we continue with microphone number 1551 00:55:14,990 --> 00:55:16,010 four back there. 1552 00:55:17,040 --> 00:55:20,149 Hello, you talked about 1553 00:55:20,150 --> 00:55:22,219 Google and having problems with 1554 00:55:22,220 --> 00:55:23,749 indexing the Internet. 1555 00:55:23,750 --> 00:55:25,909 So this would also hit 1556 00:55:25,910 --> 00:55:28,579 archiving pages like 1557 00:55:28,580 --> 00:55:29,909 Wayback Machine. 1558 00:55:29,910 --> 00:55:32,149 That would mean we would lose 1559 00:55:32,150 --> 00:55:34,669 all independent archiving 1560 00:55:34,670 --> 00:55:37,229 of the news of the last 20 years. 1561 00:55:37,230 --> 00:55:39,319 But do you think about this? 1562 00:55:39,320 --> 00:55:41,689 Well, there are a lot of archiving 1563 00:55:41,690 --> 00:55:43,759 websites like the Internet Archive 1564 00:55:43,760 --> 00:55:46,009 for all the abandoned where Web sites for 1565 00:55:46,010 --> 00:55:47,809 old software and stuff like that that 1566 00:55:47,810 --> 00:55:50,089 basically operate on the assumption 1567 00:55:50,090 --> 00:55:52,639 that the people who are 1568 00:55:52,640 --> 00:55:54,559 the rights holders probably don't care 1569 00:55:54,560 --> 00:55:55,509 about this anymore. 1570 00:55:55,510 --> 00:55:57,769 Nobody is really hurt if there is 1571 00:55:57,770 --> 00:55:59,689 abandoned where available because it's no 1572 00:55:59,690 --> 00:56:01,849 longer commercially on the market. 1573 00:56:01,850 --> 00:56:03,859 And so they can rely on this notice and 1574 00:56:03,860 --> 00:56:04,949 takedown mechanism. 1575 00:56:04,950 --> 00:56:07,009 They only have to take it down if the 1576 00:56:07,010 --> 00:56:08,869 rights holder tells them to, but the 1577 00:56:08,870 --> 00:56:11,029 rights holder never will because 1578 00:56:11,030 --> 00:56:12,169 there is no damage. 1579 00:56:12,170 --> 00:56:15,019 So this actually works pretty well. 1580 00:56:15,020 --> 00:56:17,299 And for them, they 1581 00:56:17,300 --> 00:56:19,789 wouldn't have to take down the content 1582 00:56:19,790 --> 00:56:21,979 with this monitoring technology either 1583 00:56:21,980 --> 00:56:24,229 unless the rights holder notifies them. 1584 00:56:24,230 --> 00:56:26,419 However, all it takes is one 1585 00:56:26,420 --> 00:56:28,609 rights holder to tell them you 1586 00:56:28,610 --> 00:56:30,529 need to make sure that my stuff is not 1587 00:56:30,530 --> 00:56:32,269 available. That would require them to 1588 00:56:32,270 --> 00:56:33,679 install this content monitoring 1589 00:56:33,680 --> 00:56:36,199 technology. So the administrative 1590 00:56:36,200 --> 00:56:38,389 and financial overhead would become 1591 00:56:38,390 --> 00:56:40,699 a lot larger and probably 1592 00:56:40,700 --> 00:56:42,799 it would make the running off 1593 00:56:42,800 --> 00:56:44,689 not for profit abandoned where websites 1594 00:56:44,690 --> 00:56:46,939 pretty much while impossible, unless 1595 00:56:46,940 --> 00:56:48,289 you have somebody with really deep 1596 00:56:48,290 --> 00:56:50,539 pockets, the only ones who might be able 1597 00:56:50,540 --> 00:56:52,789 to do it would be libraries 1598 00:56:52,790 --> 00:56:54,679 that would be able to rely on an 1599 00:56:54,680 --> 00:56:55,729 exception or another. 1600 00:56:55,730 --> 00:56:58,039 But if it's platforms where the users 1601 00:56:58,040 --> 00:57:00,619 actively upload stuff, then they would 1602 00:57:00,620 --> 00:57:01,620 fall under this. 1603 00:57:03,140 --> 00:57:04,879 OK, we go over to a signal. 1604 00:57:04,880 --> 00:57:06,050 Angel, please. 1605 00:57:07,490 --> 00:57:09,349 What should we expect from the new 1606 00:57:09,350 --> 00:57:11,539 digital commissioner? 1607 00:57:11,540 --> 00:57:13,669 So for the time being, the 1608 00:57:13,670 --> 00:57:15,799 new digital commissioner's endless answer 1609 00:57:15,800 --> 00:57:17,269 appears. 1610 00:57:17,270 --> 00:57:19,489 He has been the vice president 1611 00:57:19,490 --> 00:57:21,439 of the European Commission for Digital 1612 00:57:21,440 --> 00:57:23,989 Affairs, and he's from Estonia, 1613 00:57:23,990 --> 00:57:25,969 which is one of the more digitally minded 1614 00:57:25,970 --> 00:57:27,319 countries in the EU. 1615 00:57:27,320 --> 00:57:29,179 I think on the plus side, you can say 1616 00:57:29,180 --> 00:57:30,889 that he certainly has a lot more 1617 00:57:30,890 --> 00:57:33,229 understanding of the technological topics 1618 00:57:33,230 --> 00:57:35,689 and Ettinger does on the negative 1619 00:57:35,690 --> 00:57:37,940 side. Well, you can accuse him of 1620 00:57:39,080 --> 00:57:41,239 having been in favor of ACTA when he was 1621 00:57:41,240 --> 00:57:42,979 prime minister of Estonia. 1622 00:57:42,980 --> 00:57:45,259 So but I think at least 1623 00:57:45,260 --> 00:57:46,969 he's he's kind of willing to talk to 1624 00:57:46,970 --> 00:57:49,429 people. And he generally 1625 00:57:49,430 --> 00:57:52,159 also has more sympathy 1626 00:57:52,160 --> 00:57:54,469 for smaller companies, for startups. 1627 00:57:54,470 --> 00:57:56,989 So he probably will want to try to create 1628 00:57:56,990 --> 00:57:59,089 an ecosystem where they can actually 1629 00:57:59,090 --> 00:58:01,009 grow. So I think that's good. 1630 00:58:01,010 --> 00:58:03,469 However, we don't know whether he will be 1631 00:58:03,470 --> 00:58:05,239 the digital commissioner in the long 1632 00:58:05,240 --> 00:58:06,889 term, because the reason for this 1633 00:58:06,890 --> 00:58:09,379 reshuffle is that the Bulgarian 1634 00:58:09,380 --> 00:58:11,599 commissioner left 1635 00:58:11,600 --> 00:58:13,939 her job and went to the World Bank 1636 00:58:13,940 --> 00:58:16,219 and now Bulgaria will need to appoint 1637 00:58:16,220 --> 00:58:17,239 a new commissioner. 1638 00:58:17,240 --> 00:58:19,009 However, Bulgaria is having a 1639 00:58:19,010 --> 00:58:20,509 constitutional crisis. 1640 00:58:20,510 --> 00:58:22,579 I don't need to go into the details, but 1641 00:58:22,580 --> 00:58:24,169 they haven't appointed anyone yet. 1642 00:58:24,170 --> 00:58:25,939 And as soon as that happens, the 1643 00:58:25,940 --> 00:58:28,789 commission may decide to change their 1644 00:58:28,790 --> 00:58:31,009 the distribution of tasks completely 1645 00:58:31,010 --> 00:58:32,010 again. 1646 00:58:33,740 --> 00:58:35,479 We go ahead with microphone number one, 1647 00:58:35,480 --> 00:58:36,779 please. 1648 00:58:36,780 --> 00:58:39,129 Julia, thank you very much for your talk. 1649 00:58:39,130 --> 00:58:40,219 I have a question. As a travel 1650 00:58:40,220 --> 00:58:42,589 photographer, I put the pictures 1651 00:58:42,590 --> 00:58:44,659 around the world on my blog 1652 00:58:44,660 --> 00:58:45,770 and I scrolled right now. 1653 00:58:46,850 --> 00:58:48,709 Well, if you are uploading your own 1654 00:58:48,710 --> 00:58:51,139 pictures to your own blog and 1655 00:58:51,140 --> 00:58:53,239 other people can't upload anything 1656 00:58:53,240 --> 00:58:55,639 to your blog, then you are not provided 1657 00:58:55,640 --> 00:58:57,259 or you're just well, you're basically 1658 00:58:57,260 --> 00:58:58,519 running your own website. 1659 00:58:58,520 --> 00:59:00,889 So this new provision only applies 1660 00:59:00,890 --> 00:59:02,869 to host providers that provide a service 1661 00:59:02,870 --> 00:59:03,859 for other people. 1662 00:59:03,860 --> 00:59:06,229 So at least on that front, you're fine. 1663 00:59:06,230 --> 00:59:08,269 I would be careful with the linking that 1664 00:59:08,270 --> 00:59:10,609 you do, but it's probably 1665 00:59:10,610 --> 00:59:11,719 OK. Thanks. 1666 00:59:13,190 --> 00:59:15,109 Microphone number four, please. 1667 00:59:15,110 --> 00:59:17,199 OK, so first of all, things for you, 1668 00:59:17,200 --> 00:59:18,739 work in an amazing talk. 1669 00:59:18,740 --> 00:59:21,049 I have some question regarding remedies 1670 00:59:21,050 --> 00:59:23,329 under a new law, because as 1671 00:59:23,330 --> 00:59:25,819 far as I know, actually under the old 1672 00:59:25,820 --> 00:59:28,009 notice and takedown though, when there 1673 00:59:28,010 --> 00:59:30,289 was an infringement, but nothing 1674 00:59:30,290 --> 00:59:32,569 happened after the note is 1675 00:59:32,570 --> 00:59:34,669 actually neither the user nor the hosting 1676 00:59:34,670 --> 00:59:37,009 website would really risk 1677 00:59:37,010 --> 00:59:38,119 anything. 1678 00:59:38,120 --> 00:59:39,260 So would that change? 1679 00:59:40,370 --> 00:59:42,739 Maybe the proposal 1680 00:59:42,740 --> 00:59:45,079 includes a provision that says that 1681 00:59:45,080 --> 00:59:47,329 the host providers need to put in place 1682 00:59:47,330 --> 00:59:49,459 a complaint mechanism 1683 00:59:49,460 --> 00:59:51,169 that would be available both to the 1684 00:59:51,170 --> 00:59:53,299 rights holders if their staff is actually 1685 00:59:53,300 --> 00:59:55,279 continuing to become available. 1686 00:59:55,280 --> 00:59:57,469 And also for the users, for 1687 00:59:57,470 --> 00:59:59,599 example, if staff has been taken down, 1688 00:59:59,600 --> 01:00:01,399 that is not an infringement. 1689 01:00:01,400 --> 01:00:03,499 Unfortunately, I don't think this will 1690 01:00:03,500 --> 01:00:05,809 really work for the users 1691 01:00:05,810 --> 01:00:08,119 because the exceptions 1692 01:00:08,120 --> 01:00:10,009 to copyright law are different in every 1693 01:00:10,010 --> 01:00:12,169 country and they also are not 1694 01:00:12,170 --> 01:00:14,399 considered to be rights themselves. 1695 01:00:14,400 --> 01:00:16,069 So basically a platform could simply 1696 01:00:16,070 --> 01:00:18,019 right into their terms of service. 1697 01:00:18,020 --> 01:00:20,119 We only accept licensed content 1698 01:00:20,120 --> 01:00:22,039 and we don't care whether this is legal 1699 01:00:22,040 --> 01:00:24,559 as a parody or whatever. 1700 01:00:24,560 --> 01:00:26,899 So the remedies are not really 1701 01:00:26,900 --> 01:00:29,239 clear. It also says that there has to be 1702 01:00:29,240 --> 01:00:31,189 some kind of round table where all the 1703 01:00:31,190 --> 01:00:33,359 different stakeholders come together. 1704 01:00:33,360 --> 01:00:35,239 So the host providers, the rights holders 1705 01:00:35,240 --> 01:00:37,309 and so on. And it really shows that the 1706 01:00:37,310 --> 01:00:39,829 commission is thinking of large companies 1707 01:00:39,830 --> 01:00:42,169 like the big major 1708 01:00:42,170 --> 01:00:44,599 labels, but not individual rights holders 1709 01:00:44,600 --> 01:00:46,789 who are most certainly not going to start 1710 01:00:46,790 --> 01:00:47,790 a round table 1711 01:00:49,050 --> 01:00:51,319 six. So I'm afraid that is all 1712 01:00:51,320 --> 01:00:54,139 the time we had for Q&A 1713 01:00:54,140 --> 01:00:56,489 with this talk. So thank you, Julia 1714 01:00:56,490 --> 01:00:58,279 Reed, for this amazing talk and the time 1715 01:00:58,280 --> 01:00:59,960 it took more question answering.