EU votes for Article 13 of Copyright Directive
EU votes for Article 13 of Copyright Directive, which will implement internet controls, and require payment for uploaded copyright materials on online platforms
Members of European Parliament (MEPs) defied warnings from internet pioneers, civil liberties groups and commercial interests un a key vote on a draft law to overhaul EU copyright rules. The European Parliament’s legal affairs committee on Wednesday June 20, 2018 voted for measures that would require the likes of Google and Microsoft to install filters to prevent users from uploading copyrighted materials. The MEPs voted narrowly for the provision, despite warnings from some of the biggest names in the internet, and civil liberties campaigners, that the law would damage freedom of expression, while entrenching the power of the biggest companies and loading costs on to European startups. The plans still have to be agreed with representatives from the EU’s 28 governments before becoming law, but the vote reduces the chances of serious changes. Opponents of the law vowed to fight on when the legislation comes before all MEPs for a final vote.
First proposed by the European commission in 2016, the law attempts to update EU copyright laws for the age of Facebook and Google, with the aim of ensuring that authors, artists and journalists are “paid fairly” for their work. Critics fear the measures would stifle freedom of expression by curtailing internet users’ ability to share content. Some lawmakers say even memes would be affected, as users would be required to take their own meme photos and give permission for others to use them. One of the most controversial provisions, article 13, would require platforms, such as Google and Microsoft, to install filters. It was adopted by the committee by 15 votes to 10.
Earlier in June, an open letter signed by 70 of the biggest names of the internet argued that article 13 would take “an unprecedented step towards the transformation of the internet from an open platform for sharing and innovation, into a tool for the automated surveillance and control of its users”. “The damage that this may do to the free and open internet as we know it is hard to predict, but in our opinions could be substantial,” the letter said. Addressed to MEPs, the internet pioneers argued that the cost would fall heavily on European tech companies, as the big platforms, which are exclusively American, could afford the costs of compliance. Internet experts are also worried about another provision adopted on Wednesday that would force internet platforms, such as Google, to pay publishers for showing snippets of news stories.
Earlier this year, a group of 169 European academics specialising in intellectual property urged MEPs to reject the “misguided” plans, which they said would “likely impede the free flow of information that is of vital importance to democracy”. Scores of academics have since added their names to the letter, which also says the proposals would be likely to harm journalists, photographers and many “non-institutional creators and producers of news”, including freelancers. The UN’s special rapporteur on freedom of expression, David Kaye, has also raised concerns about “prepublication censorship”, with automatic filters being unable to detect fair comment, satire, criticism and parody.
In a rare feat, the law has united consumer and tech lobbies in opposition. Monique Goyens, the director general of the European Consumer Organisation, said MEPs had failed to find a solution to benefit consumers and creators. “The internet as we know it will change when platforms will need to systematically filter content that users want to upload. The internet will change from a place where consumers can enjoy sharing creations and ideas to an environment that is restricted and controlled.”
Meanwhile, Digital Europe said the “unworkable liability regime [for] content filtering will damage rather than aid the online and creative market”. Tech companies also fear the new law will fragment the EU’s online single market, because national governments would decide how “link taxes” would work in their country. Axel Voss, the centre-right MEP who is steering the proposal through parliament, rejected the criticism. “No one is and no one will ever filter the internet,” he said in a statement, while defending the central idea. “These platforms make a considerable profit on the works uploaded by its users, so they can’t simply hide behind the argument that it is the users who are uploading, while the platform is making money from it.”
Article 13 from Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on copyright in the Digital Single Market
CHAPTER 2 Certain uses of protected content by online services
Article 13 -Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to large amounts of works and other subject-matter uploaded by their users
1.Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation with right holders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with right holders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by right holders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide right holders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter.
2.Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1.
3.Member States shall facilitate, where appropriate, the cooperation between the information society service providers and rightholders through stakeholder dialogues to define best practices, such as appropriate and proportionate content recognition technologies, taking into account, among others, the nature of the services, the availability of the technologies and their effectiveness in light of technological developments.
Contributed by Magdalena A K Muir
Sources:
Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on copyright in the Digital Single Market, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/
Guardian News Reports
EU votes for copyright law that would make internet a ‘tool for control’, https://www.theguardian.com/
YouTube faces paying billions to music stars after copyright vote, Platforms could have to seek licencesfor videos after European parliament action
https://www.theguardian.com/
Open Letter, https://www.eff.org/files/
Deconstructing Article 13 of the Copyright proposal of the European Commission, https://edri.org/files/