In any case, I've read the proposed legal document. I found it quite vaguely formulated (which, in recent EU trends, is actually quite surprising). The document requires the states to take measures that are proportional to achieve the goal, but also requires them to respect the common EU values (which includes free speech etc.). In other words, if member states were to ban memes completely, this law would not hold in front of any court because of the measure being disproportionate.
Of course, there's always a chance of abuse (and it makes complete sense that experts warn about that), but I think the risk may be exaggerated a bit, since (as Ripley said), it's up to the member state what exact measures to take, and I would be surprised to see a highly restrictive measure being implemented.
Selwink wrote:
In any case, I've read the proposed legal document. I found it quite vaguely formulated (which, in recent EU trends, is actually quite surprising). The document requires the states to take measures that are proportional to achieve the goal, but also requires them to respect the common EU values (which includes free speech etc.). In other words, if member states were to ban memes completely, this law would not hold in front of any court because of the measure being disproportionate.
Of course, there's always a chance of abuse (and it makes complete sense that experts warn about that), but I think the risk may be exaggerated a bit, since (as Ripley said), it's up to the member state what exact measures to take, and I would be surprised to see a highly restrictive measure being implemented.
But see, that's where you're wrong. Yes, it's up to each state, but that makes it even worse, since website hosts will just use the strictest rules to not get problems from any place. it's not like a german website can't get trouble if f.e. french people can upload stuff, there that they can't in france, so the german site will also adhere the french rules, leading to very strict upload filters. also the practical part is a issue. The filters are not 100% precise, which will lead to blocking more than they should, because they'll program a "buffer" into the algorithm obviously.
Also, we all know that censorship already exists. It's not like its a new thing in the internet. Also in the western world. For example the hashtag #fckart13 was invisible until 10 minutes after the vote finished. it didn't get into the popular tweets despite getting much more talk than loads of the other tweets at that time. Could be a coincidence, but thats not the first time, twitter uses "shadowbanning" in one way or another. I'm just highly concerned about the free speech and freedom of information on the internet and I'm just a bit sick of people telling me to just "chill and watch the world cup". They are part of the problem. They are the reason why we can bring stupid laws through during the world cup.
As from what I know there are some laws in germany already being accepted, during the world cup. I'm not sure, if I'm allowed to talk about them here, since I only know them through my job and I'd like to keep my job. But if that's actually the case, that's just more bad news.
But see, that's where you're wrong. Yes, it's up to each state, but that makes it even worse, since website hosts will just use the strictest rules to not get problems from any place. it's not like a german website can't get trouble if f.e. french people can upload stuff, there that they can't in france, so the german site will also adhere the french rules, leading to very strict upload filters. also the practical part is a issue. The filters are not 100% precise, which will lead to blocking more than they should, because they'll program a "buffer" into the algorithm obviously.
But still, member states are not allowed to pass a law that is considered too strict, because that law would not hold in front of court. So yes, they will follow the strictest law, but that does not necessarily mean that this law is too strict.
Also, we all know that censorship already exists. It's not like its a new thing in the internet. Also in the western world. For example the hashtag #fckart13 was invisible until 10 minutes after the vote finished. it didn't get into the popular tweets despite getting much more talk than loads of the other tweets at that time. Could be a coincidence, but thats not the first time, twitter uses "shadowbanning" in one way or another.
That Twitter censors stuff is obviously bad, but that has nothing to do with the EU or its member states, but rather with Twitter's own policy, and unless you believe in some conspiracy theory, Twitter's policy is not steered completely by state parties.
I'm just highly concerned about the free speech and freedom of information on the internet and I'm just a bit sick of people telling me to just "chill and watch the world cup". They are part of the problem. They are the reason why we can bring stupid laws through during the world cup.
Completely agree on this.
As from what I know there are some laws in germany already being accepted, during the world cup. I'm not sure, if I'm allowed to talk about them here, since I only know them through my job and I'd like to keep my job. But if that's actually the case, that's just more bad news.
If a law is accepted, it's normally published as well in the thing you call Bundesgesetzblatt (I think). Any new law must be published there (or at least that's the case with Dutch law or EU law with its respective public journal. That should mean you're not in trouble.
I rather not quote again here....will get too huge.
I don't think that twitter is state controlled. Never said that. I just stated a case of censorship in the media. if it was just an algorythm or if someone told twitter to censor that hashtag for example is nothing I can say. I don't neccessarily think it's controlled by any states, but tbh nothing would surprise me there.
You're basically correct with everything you say, but thats the theoretical standpoint.
f.e. The NetzDG in germany( a law, thats pretty strict and thats banning "hate-speech" ) should also not be legal, but it is a law now. It censors certain opinions on the internet. Especially unpopular ones. That's a reason why I'm fearing the Article 11 and 13.
About the last part. Yes. A law needs to be announced in the Bundesgesetzblatt when it's becoming active, but since those laws just got accepted and are not active yet, they can be kept secret in some cases.
Never said you did believe that either, but glad you don't
f.e. The NetzDG in germany( a law, thats pretty strict and thats banning "hate-speech" ) should also not be legal, but it is a law now
That's a national law which is not based on an EU law and so can't be tested in front of the ECJ, unlike laws based on the copyright directive. I do think that the NetzDG is a terrible law though. Can't your constitutional court stop that?
And I completely get your fears on the copyright directive. I just don't think that the doom scenario that has been sketched is very realistic.
I will try to briefly make a point here: All constitutional rights have their limits, and for good reason. You can't yell "Fire!" for no reason in a crowded theatre. And insulting people isn't protected by free speech, either. Nor is inciting violence or distributing pictures of naked children in pornographic poses, etc, etc.
So some form of censorship is actually a good thing, curtailing one person's rights but protecting those of others. Obviously, it's a thin line, censorship can easily go too far or be used politically. Plenty of examples of that around the world. But you have to balance everybody's rights and can't let the internet be a lawless void. But it's hard, any attempts at maintaining the balance - like that NetzDG - are met with harsh criticism, but those critics never seem to offer a better solution.
Totally off topic, but for 13 years I drove a Volvo Amazon and loved that car. But rust finally got the better of it and now I drive a boring Golf (though admittedly, the comfort of a new-ish car is nice).
And here is an old photo of that lovely car, a real Swedish import, built in 1967:
You can tell just how old the photo is from the non-EU-numberplate. Or probably even more shocking for some of you, this is a photo taken with my crappy smartphone of a real photo! Back when cameras still used film which you got developed and printed onto these funny sheets of paper.
To clarify: I bought the car in 1995, it was old even back then. And I was still in university, I'm old, but not that old.
Edited by Ripley on 26-06-2018 18:18
Totally off topic, but for 13 years I drove a Volvo Amazon and loved that car. But rust finally got the better of it and now I drive a boring Golf (though admittedly, the comfort of a new-ish car is nice).
And here is an old photo of that lovely car, a real Swedish import, built in 1967:
You can tell just how old the photo is from the non-EU-numberplate. Or probably even more shocking for some of you, this is a photo taken with my crappy smartphone of a real photo! Back when cameras still used film which you got developed and printed onto these funny sheets of paper.
To clarify: I bought the car in 1995, it was old even back then. And I was still in university, I'm old, but not that old.
It looks a nice car, would have been great in its day
My first car was a Vauxhall Nova Swing :
The cheapest car i have ever run (when it comes to petrol that is)
Selwink wrote:
Never said you did believe that either, but glad you don't
f.e. The NetzDG in germany( a law, thats pretty strict and thats banning "hate-speech" ) should also not be legal, but it is a law now
That's a national law which is not based on an EU law and so can't be tested in front of the ECJ, unlike laws based on the copyright directive. I do think that the NetzDG is a terrible law though. Can't your constitutional court stop that?
And I completely get your fears on the copyright directive. I just don't think that the doom scenario that has been sketched is very realistic.
Sorry, that I just now answer on it.
Yeah, could be different because it's a national law and no, I'm not sure if the NetzDG can be stopped now.
I can fully understand and accept your opinion. I just hope for the best.
But because I don't want to stop the new topic....
Great cars you guys drive/have driven.
Maybe I'm a bit too young for that, but here's my first/current car.
This is actually my car, hence the edited faces and numberplate.
Man, that is an ugly car. But my first one was a VW Polo, first run, cheap and ugly, too, and painted in a beautiful lime green. It didn't last long.
here's my first/current car.
On a race track! Probably not somebody I want to meet on the Autobahn. Nice and slow is the way to go, you arrive only a few minutes later but are totally relaxed.
Man, that is an ugly car. But my first one was a VW Polo, first run, cheap and ugly, too, and painted in a beautiful lime green. It didn't last long.
here's my first/current car.
On a race track! Probably not somebody I want to meet on the Autobahn. Nice and slow is the way to go, you arrive only a few minutes later but are totally relaxed.
Off on a trip to Rock Werchter in Belgium today, currently sitting in changi airport at Singapore mindlessly bored awaiting my 12am flight to Berlin (of which I’ll be for a few days beforehand). As it’s my first time in Europe, any tips to avoid getting myself killed would be much appreciated
A quick trip from Australia to Belgium for a music festival? First time in Europe? Wow. Well, Europe is great and Berlin's amazing (full disclosure: it's my home town). Don't think there's any chance of getting killed, I'm afraid. I'm sure you'll have a great time and take home lots of memories.
Eden95 wrote:
Off on a trip to Rock Werchter in Belgium today, currently sitting in changi airport at Singapore mindlessly bored awaiting my 12am flight to Berlin (of which I’ll be for a few days beforehand). As it’s my first time in Europe, any tips to avoid getting myself killed would be much appreciated
