Jump to content
270soft Forum
NYrepublican

The EU breaking the internet

Recommended Posts

This article 13 is unreasonable

Its demands that YouTube prevent the uploading of any copyrights and holds them liable for it is unreasonable. It is impossible for YouTube to manually review for fair use over 400 hours of video a minute so they'll have to use AI and this will cause the copyright issues to greatly increase from what it is under YouTube current system. It stands to shut down many critiques,parodies etc. due to copyright paranoia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, NYrepublican said:

This article 13 is unreasonable

Its demands that YouTube prevent the uploading of any copyrights and holds them liable for it is unreasonable. It is impossible for YouTube to manually review for fair use over 400 hours of video a minute so they'll have to use AI and this will cause the copyright issues to greatly increase from what it is under YouTube current system. It stands to shut down many critiques,parodies etc. due to copyright paranoia.

A corporation like YouTube should have considered this from it's inception. The current version of MDCA in the U.S. COULD be easily used to exactly the same thing if a future Department of Justice wishes. In retrospect, YouTube's lack of foresight and internal regulation set themselves up for this, and other potential legal catastrophes, such as the MDCA one I stated above. But corporations as a whole, especially big ones, are showing greater and greater amounts of lack of long-term vision, but only seeing short-term, maximal profit, and that tendency is not only hurting them, but the whole global economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Patine said:

A corporation like YouTube should have considered this from it's inception. The current version of MDCA in the U.S. COULD be easily used to exactly the same thing if a future Department of Justice wishes. In retrospect, YouTube's lack of foresight and internal regulation set themselves up for this, and other potential legal catastrophes, such as the MDCA one I stated above. But corporations as a whole, especially big ones, are showing greater and greater amounts of lack of long-term vision, but only seeing short-term, maximal profit, and that tendency is not only hurting them, but the whole global economy.

OK How should Youtube monitor 400 Hours being uploaded a minute for fair use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

OK How should Youtube monitor 400 Hours being uploaded a minute for fair use?

They should have set something up from the start. Big corporations EXPECTING and FEELING ENTITLED to national laws and regulations changing, having glaring exemptions, and bending over backwards because of the lack of foresight of those that founded and run a private, corporate entity making mistakes that become untenable for them is one of the big (there several big ones - but this is one) of the breaking and failing of modern Corporatism as a viable, long-term economic system, like Communism, Colonialism/Imperialism, Mercantalism, and Feudalism before it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know, it's stressing me out! I've had to resort to using a VPN to get around it! And only now you're bringing it up here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Patine said:

They should have set something up from the start. Big corporations EXPECTING and FEELING ENTITLED to national laws and regulations changing, having glaring exemptions, and bending over backwards because of the lack of foresight of those that founded and run a private, corporate entity making mistakes that become untenable for them is one of the big (there several big ones - but this is one) of the breaking and failing of modern Corporatism as a viable, long-term economic system, like Communism, Colonialism/Imperialism, Mercantalism, and Feudalism before it.

What SHOULD they have done specificially? Name me an action they SHOULD have taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NYrepublican said:

What SHOULD they have done specificially? Name me an action they SHOULD have taken.

I'm not an expert in streaming and programming. I'm just saying that, just because their way of working makes complying with national regulations and laws when they're called due untenable doesn't mean they should be entitled to exemptions from, and special treatment under, the law, JUST because they're YouTube...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Patine said:

I'm not an expert in streaming and programming. I'm just saying that, just because their way of working makes complying with national regulations and laws when they're called due untenable doesn't mean they should be entitled to exemptions from, and special treatment under, the law, JUST because they're YouTube...

Where did I say they should be granted an exception for being YouTube? The law is bad for all such streamers including but in no way limited to Youtube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NYrepublican said:

Where did I say they should be granted an exception for being YouTube? The law is bad for all such streamers including but in no way limited to Youtube.

So ALL streamers should be freely allowed to completely ignore copyright laws, because otherwise the situation would unmanageable with the available streaming technology and management methods, and all holders of intellectual properties should just suck it and the whole concept of IP be globally collectivized in a Marxist-Leninist abolition of propriety?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Patine said:

So ALL streamers should be freely allowed to completely ignore copyright laws, because otherwise the situation would unmanageable with the available streaming technology and management methods, and all holders of intellectual properties should just suck it and the whole concept of IP be globally collectivized in a Marxist-Leninist abolition of propriety?

They shouldn't be held liable for what people upload to their public sharing sites provided they remove it once a claim with sufficent evidence and grounding and with a fair hearing for the content creator is had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

They shouldn't be held liable for what people upload to their public sharing sites provided they remove it once a claim with sufficent evidence and grounding and with a fair hearing for the content creator is had.

Then they'll just get swamped with claims instead. Like the threat made to Napster in the day after Metallica launched it's lawsuit, but shortly before the site folded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Patine said:

 Then they'll just get swamped with claims instead. Like the threat made to Napster in the day after Metallica launched it's lawsuit, but shortly before the site folded.

I said an appeal to the company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

I said an appeal to the company.

But if the company arbitrarily dismisses their appeal when the copyright owner still has reason to believe their IP rights have been infringed, does not the copyright owner have the right to take it to court rather than accept a company whose a party in the dispute and whose point of view in extremely heavy in bias by nature as having the final statement on the issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Patine said:

 But if the company arbitrarily dismisses their appeal when the copyright owner still has reason to believe their IP rights have been infringed, does not the copyright owner have the right to take it to court rather than accept a company whose a party in the dispute and whose point of view in extremely heavy in bias by nature as having the final statement on the issue?

That will create a checks and balance system which'll force companies to be reasonable as Youtube already is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wiw said:

Oh, copyright is for corporatists anyway! And corporatists always win...

You are incorrect utterly. As an aspiring author myself - just unpublished at this point - copyright protection can be ALL be that secures ANY income at ALL for people such as many authors, artists, and musicians, the VAST majority of which do NOT make massive royalties and profits, become horribly famous, and live glamorous lifestyles - only a statistical minority get that privilege. But, once again, ignorance and lack of education stated as though a self-righteous declaration of "fact" to back up arguments in an erroneous way is becoming more and more common - but, one of those problems that guilt is not restricted to one political ideological camp or another (even it's in the sort of category of basic flaw of thought and conduct many idiots today like to claim opposing ideological camps have a complete monopoly on, all the more spreading the stupidity), but is something seen in growing instances across the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Wiw said:

Then how has it become a crutch for greed and power?

The same way so much else has in this world. I mean religion in many circles has turned into a vehicle for undue power, greed, and abuse (see Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and others of their ilk in the U.S., Fred Niles in Australia, Ian Paisley in the U.K., old Pan-German Lutheran-Evangelist preachers, a LOT of high-ranking Catholics, including a LOT of Popes, the vile Prosperity Gospel - or Mammon Gospel, I should say - and the stain and blight upon Christiandom that is John Calvin and all who adhere to his wish-fulfillment, "easy-mode" view of Salvation, among Christians, as well these "Islamists," who claim to be harkening back to "original, Medieval Caliphate practices" when they don't even resemble them AT ALL, nor do they behave in accordance with actual obvious Quranic scripture anymore than the leaders I listed above them actually follow Christ's message, ministry, and teachings at all, and Modi and his BJP group, and their views on Hinduism, and many of Netanyahu's coalition allies views on Judaism, and views held by Buddhists in government and the military in countries like Myanmar and Sri Lanka, etc). And, of course, even outside the purely religious aspects and origins, holiday, marriage, and funeral industries have also become vulture industries, feeding upon sensationalism and playing people's heartstrings like harps for raw profit. So, is big corporations exploiting copyright laws, which were originally created in 1700-1800's to protect individual writers and creative artists and their work, for huge profit mills?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Patine said:

 and many of Netanyahu's coalition allies views on Judaism,

Ah how nice the Gentiles apparently now know more about Judaism than Jews. (Sarcasm)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NYrepublican said:

Ah how nice the Gentiles apparently now know more about Judaism than Jews. (Sarcasm)

Are there books of Jewish scripture whose existence is unknown to non-Jews to this day? Or even Jewish rites, holidays, and ceremonies? And, why is Judaism divided by sectarian divisions in similar ways to Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism, if all Jews know and agree upon ALL the same aspects of their religion and it's practice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Patine said:

Are there books of Jewish scripture whose existence is unknown to non-Jews to this day? Or even Jewish rites, holidays, and ceremonies? And, why is Judaism divided by sectarian divisions in similar ways to Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism, if all Jews know and agree upon ALL the same aspects of their religion and it's practice?

I'm not telling you how to be a good Christian, you in turn shouldn't be telling me how to be a Good Jew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NYrepublican said:

I'm not telling you how to be a good Christian, you in turn shouldn't be telling me how to be a Good Jew.

I do not believe that any follower of any Abrahamic Monotheist religion, be it Judaism, Christianity, or Islam, should ever support the military or foreign policy of ANY nation where that policy is backed by nuclear weapons - an obvious, to any fool (though such fools seem to abound) blasphemy and high affront to God and His Creation by splitting the very building blocks He built the world on to produce unholy destruction and blight upon His Earth to prosecute vane wars - and that the nations who use these implements of high sacrilege - probably the greatest every commit by humanity upon the Earth to date, if you think about what it means and what is it - should be denounced, called to task, and have their sinful governments and evil engines of sin cast down by any pious member of any Abrahamic Religion - be that nation the United States, France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Russia, Pakistan - or the nation and government of Israel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...