Skip to main content

Cerca

Elementi taggati con: copyright


 
Dopodomani si vota per l'articolo 11 e per l'articolo 13 (rinominato articolo 17) della direttiva sul copyright, la votazione è l'ultima se passa la direttiva diventa legge europea e dovrà obbligatoriamente essere approvata dai singoli stati senza eccezioni.

Il voto è: 26 Marzo alle 12h30 CET su Article 17 [ex Article 13]

#Copyright #SaveYourInternet

https://saveyourinternet.eu/act/

From 20 to 27 March, it’s Copyright Action Week: Time to #SaveYourInternet! For the Action Week, we automatically redirected you to the ‘Act Now’ page, and encourage you to select your country and to get in touch with your Members of the European Parliament, who will vote on 26 March at 12h30 CET on Article 17 [ex Article 13]. Please note that in the final text that MEPs will vote on Article 13 has been renumbered to Article 17.
Act Now


 
This is the last chance to change the course of the approval of Articles 11 and 13 in the new EU copyright directive.

These articles will impose restrictions that will have dampening effect on the free flow of information on the Internet, hindering the environment that helped give rise to all Free Software, including KDE.

Although the new directive contains provisions that protect Free Software projects (like KDE) and non-profits (like Wikipedia), this is far from future-proof.

The rise of movements we can only imagine now, but that could be similarly beneficial to that of Free Software, will be impeded by an Internet restricted by articles 11 and 13. It would be far better if articles 11 and 13 simply did not happen.

You can help stop this by getting in touch with your representative in the EU parliament. Find out how you can do this here:
Act Now


 
This is the last chance to change the course of the approval of Articles 11 and 13 in the new EU copyright directive.

These articles will impose restrictions that will have dampening effect on the free flow of information on the Internet, hindering the environment that helped give rise to all Free Software, including KDE.

Although the new directive contains provisions that protect Free Software projects (like KDE) and non-profits (like Wikipedia), this is far from future-proof.

The rise of movements we can only imagine now, but that could be similarly beneficial to that of Free Software, will be impeded by an Internet restricted by articles 11 and 13. It would be far better if articles 11 and 13 simply did not happen.

You can help stop this by getting in touch with your representative in the EU parliament. Find out how you can do this here:
Act Now


 
It's official: The vote on the #copyright directive will take place Tuesday, March 26 at noon! This is the earliest possible time to vote, supporters of #Article11 and #Article13 are getting nervous. Time to turn out in droves for the protests on Saturday!
Julia Reda


 
#Copyright #DirittoDAutore
#English and/e #Italiano (sub)



The EU votation is 26/27 of this month.

https://twitter.com/tvol/status/1108766156683247617/photo/1
and today Wikipedia is blacked out in Germany, Denmark, Czech Republic, Slovakia to protest against #Article13. #SaveYourInternet

Twitter: Timothy Vollmer on Twitter (Timothy Vollmer)


 
Française, English, Deutsch, Italiano

de.wikipedia.org #Wikipedia #Copyright #EU

Française: Wikipedia en allemand sera obscurci quelques jours avant le vote du Parlement européen sur la directive sur le droit d'auteur.
English: Wikipedia in German will be obscured a few days before the vote in the European Parliament on the copyright directive.
Deutsch: Wenige Tage vor der Abstimmung im Europäischen Parlament über die Urheberrechtsrichtlinie wird Wikipedia auf Deutsch verdunkelt.
Italiano: Wikipedia in lingua tedesca sarà oscurata qualche giorno prima della votazione al parlamento europeo sulla direttiva sul copyright.

Reference:


 
Protest gegen Artikel 13: Wikipedia schaltet sich ab




#Heise #Wikipedia #EU #Artikel13 #Internet #Copyright #AxelVoss #CDU


 
So, see you tomorrow on the streets because of the #copyright reform in the #EU. But there is more coming from Brussels at the moment, that needs an urgent reaction. Like in by Monday...

The EU Radio Lockdown Directive

FSFE ha scritto:

Radio signals are everywhere and increasingly many devices connect using wireless and mobile networks or GPS. Legal regulations of the usage of radio signals are increasing, too. Now, a European directive wants to revise and extend them by demanding device manufacturers to check each device software's compliance. At first sight, this may sound reasonable but it has highly negative implications on user rights and Free Software, fair competition, innovation, environment, and volunteering – mostly without comparably large benefits for security unfortunately.


Read on in the blog posting by @Max Mehl
Protect freedom on radio devices: raise your voice today!


 
#Copyright direttiva europea

A questo punto, il testo della norma sembra procedere pericolosamente verso l'approvazione che in tanti speravano di evitare e passa alla seconda plenaria di marzo a Strasburgo, che si terrà dal 25 al 28.

Copyright, l’approvazione della direttiva è in arrivo (e non è una bella notizia)
Solo a fine gennaio l’approvazione della direttiva europea sul Copyright si era arenata, facendo sperare che non ci fossero più i tempi tecnici per approvarla, viste anche le imminenti elezioni europee di fine maggio. Ma Il fatto nuovo è che la commissione affari giuridici del Parlamento europeo ha dato il via libera all’accordo informale del “trilogo” dando appuntamento alla plenaria dell’Europarlamento a fine marzo. E non è una bella notizia.

https://tech.fanpage.it/copyright-lapprovazione-della-direttiva-e-in-arrivo-e-non-e-una-bella-notizia/

Contatta il tuo europarlamentare,
la lista degli europarlamantari:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/home


 
Directive de l'UE sur le droit d'auteur
#Copyright
Vote final

A ce stade, le texte de la règle semble se diriger dangereusement vers l'approbation que beaucoup espéraient éviter et passe à la deuxième session plénière du mois de mars à Strasbourg, qui se tiendra du 25 au 28.

Contactez votre #MEP
Liste des députés européens :


 
#Copyright EU Directive

Final Vote

At this point, the text of the rule seems to be moving dangerously towards the approval that many hoped to avoid and passes to the second plenary session in March in Strasbourg, which will be held from 25 to 28.

Contact Your #MEP
List of MEPs:


 
Manifeste de la Guérilla pour le #Libre Accès

L’ #information, c’est le pouvoir. Mais comme pour tout pouvoir, il y a ceux qui
veulent le garder pour eux. Le patrimoine culturel et scientifique mondial,
publié depuis plusieurs siècles dans les livres et les revues, est de plus en
plus souvent numérisé puis verrouillé par une poignée d’entreprises privées.
Vous voulez lire les articles présentant les plus célèbres résultats
scientifiques ? Il vous faudra payer de grosses sommes à des éditeurs comme Reed
Elsevier.

Et il y a ceux qui luttent pour que cela change. Le mouvement pour le libre
accès s’est vaillamment battu pour s’assurer que les scientifiques ne mettent
pas toutes leurs publications sous #copyright et s’assurer plutôt que leurs
travaux seront publiés sur Internet sous des conditions qui en permettent
l’accès à tous. Mais, même dans le scénario le plus optimiste, la politique de
libre accès ne concerne que les publications futures. Tout ce qui a été fait
jusqu’à présent est perdu.

C’est trop cher payé. Contraindre les universitaires à débourser de l’argent
pour lire le travail de leurs collègues ? Numériser des #bibliothèques entières
mais ne permettre qu’aux gens de chez Google de les lire ? Fournir des articles
scientifiques aux chercheurs des plus grandes universités des pays riches, mais
pas aux enfants des pays du Sud ? C’est scandaleux et inacceptable.

Nombreux sont ceux qui disent : « Je suis d’accord mais que peut-on y faire ?
Les entreprises possèdent les droits de reproduction de ces documents, elles
gagnent énormément d’argent en faisant payer l’accès, et c’est parfaitement
légal, il n’y a rien que l’on puisse faire pour les en empêcher. » Mais si, on
peut faire quelque chose, ce qu’on est déjà en train de faire : riposter.

Vous qui avez accès à ces ressources, étudiants, bibliothécaires, scientifiques,
on vous a donné un privilège. Vous pouvez vous nourrir au banquet de la
connaissance pendant que le reste du monde en est exclu. Mais vous n’êtes pas
obligés — moralement, vous n’en avez même pas le droit — de conserver ce
privilège pour vous seuls. Il est de votre devoir de le partager avec le monde.
Et c’est ce que vous avez fait : en échangeant vos mots de passe avec vos
collègues, en remplissant des formulaires de téléchargement pour vos amis.

Pendant ce temps, ceux qui ont été écartés de ce festin n’attendent pas sans
rien faire. Vous vous êtes faufilés dans les brèches et avez escaladé les
barrières, libérant l’information verrouillée par les éditeurs pour la partager
avec vos amis.

Mais toutes ces actions se déroulent dans l’ombre, de façon souterraine. On les
qualifie de « vol » ou bien de « piratage », comme si partager une abondance de
connaissances était moralement équivalent à l’abordage d’un vaisseau et au
meurtre de son équipage. Mais le partage n’est pas immoral, c’est un impératif
moral. Seuls ceux qu’aveugle la cupidité refusent une copie à leurs amis.

Les grandes #multinationales, bien sûr, sont aveuglées par la cupidité. Les lois
qui les gouvernent l’exigent, leurs actionnaires se révolteraient à la moindre
occasion. Et les politiciens qu’elles ont achetés les soutiennent en votant des
lois qui leur donnent le pouvoir exclusif de décider qui est en droit de faire
des copies.

La justice ne consiste pas à se soumettre à des lois injustes. Il est temps de
sortir de l’ombre et, dans la grande tradition de la #désobéissance civile,
d’affirmer notre opposition à la confiscation criminelle de la #culture publique.

Nous avons besoin de récolter l’information où qu’elle soit stockée, d’en faire
des copies et de la partager avec le monde. Nous devons nous emparer du domaine
#public et l’ajouter aux archives. Nous devons acheter des bases de données
secrètes et les mettre sur le #Web. Nous devons télécharger des revues
scientifiques et les poster sur des réseaux de partage de fichiers. Nous devons
mener le combat de la guérilla pour le libre accès.

Lorsque nous serons assez nombreux de par le monde, nous n’enverrons pas
seulement un puissant message d’opposition à la privatisation de la #connaissance :
nous ferons en sorte que cette #privatisation appartienne au passé. Serez-vous
des nôtres ?

Aaron #Swartz
Juillet 2008, Eremo, Italie

#politique #sciences #medecine #recherche #hacker #hacktivisme


 
Manifeste de la Guérilla pour le #Libre Accès

L’ #information, c’est le pouvoir. Mais comme pour tout pouvoir, il y a ceux qui
veulent le garder pour eux. Le patrimoine culturel et scientifique mondial,
publié depuis plusieurs siècles dans les livres et les revues, est de plus en
plus souvent numérisé puis verrouillé par une poignée d’entreprises privées.
Vous voulez lire les articles présentant les plus célèbres résultats
scientifiques ? Il vous faudra payer de grosses sommes à des éditeurs comme Reed
Elsevier.

Et il y a ceux qui luttent pour que cela change. Le mouvement pour le libre
accès s’est vaillamment battu pour s’assurer que les scientifiques ne mettent
pas toutes leurs publications sous #copyright et s’assurer plutôt que leurs
travaux seront publiés sur Internet sous des conditions qui en permettent
l’accès à tous. Mais, même dans le scénario le plus optimiste, la politique de
libre accès ne concerne que les publications futures. Tout ce qui a été fait
jusqu’à présent est perdu.

C’est trop cher payé. Contraindre les universitaires à débourser de l’argent
pour lire le travail de leurs collègues ? Numériser des #bibliothèques entières
mais ne permettre qu’aux gens de chez Google de les lire ? Fournir des articles
scientifiques aux chercheurs des plus grandes universités des pays riches, mais
pas aux enfants des pays du Sud ? C’est scandaleux et inacceptable.

Nombreux sont ceux qui disent : « Je suis d’accord mais que peut-on y faire ?
Les entreprises possèdent les droits de reproduction de ces documents, elles
gagnent énormément d’argent en faisant payer l’accès, et c’est parfaitement
légal, il n’y a rien que l’on puisse faire pour les en empêcher. » Mais si, on
peut faire quelque chose, ce qu’on est déjà en train de faire : riposter.

Vous qui avez accès à ces ressources, étudiants, bibliothécaires, scientifiques,
on vous a donné un privilège. Vous pouvez vous nourrir au banquet de la
connaissance pendant que le reste du monde en est exclu. Mais vous n’êtes pas
obligés — moralement, vous n’en avez même pas le droit — de conserver ce
privilège pour vous seuls. Il est de votre devoir de le partager avec le monde.
Et c’est ce que vous avez fait : en échangeant vos mots de passe avec vos
collègues, en remplissant des formulaires de téléchargement pour vos amis.

Pendant ce temps, ceux qui ont été écartés de ce festin n’attendent pas sans
rien faire. Vous vous êtes faufilés dans les brèches et avez escaladé les
barrières, libérant l’information verrouillée par les éditeurs pour la partager
avec vos amis.

Mais toutes ces actions se déroulent dans l’ombre, de façon souterraine. On les
qualifie de « vol » ou bien de « piratage », comme si partager une abondance de
connaissances était moralement équivalent à l’abordage d’un vaisseau et au
meurtre de son équipage. Mais le partage n’est pas immoral, c’est un impératif
moral. Seuls ceux qu’aveugle la cupidité refusent une copie à leurs amis.

Les grandes #multinationales, bien sûr, sont aveuglées par la cupidité. Les lois
qui les gouvernent l’exigent, leurs actionnaires se révolteraient à la moindre
occasion. Et les politiciens qu’elles ont achetés les soutiennent en votant des
lois qui leur donnent le pouvoir exclusif de décider qui est en droit de faire
des copies.

La justice ne consiste pas à se soumettre à des lois injustes. Il est temps de
sortir de l’ombre et, dans la grande tradition de la #désobéissance civile,
d’affirmer notre opposition à la confiscation criminelle de la #culture publique.

Nous avons besoin de récolter l’information où qu’elle soit stockée, d’en faire
des copies et de la partager avec le monde. Nous devons nous emparer du domaine
#public et l’ajouter aux archives. Nous devons acheter des bases de données
secrètes et les mettre sur le #Web. Nous devons télécharger des revues
scientifiques et les poster sur des réseaux de partage de fichiers. Nous devons
mener le combat de la guérilla pour le libre accès.

Lorsque nous serons assez nombreux de par le monde, nous n’enverrons pas
seulement un puissant message d’opposition à la privatisation de la #connaissance :
nous ferons en sorte que cette #privatisation appartienne au passé. Serez-vous
des nôtres ?

Aaron #Swartz
Juillet 2008, Eremo, Italie

#politique #sciences #medecine #recherche #hacker #hacktivisme


 

Canada: Avis pour téléchargement illégal : il n'est plus permis de réclamer de l'argent


#Canada #Internet #Téléchargement #Copyright


 
Afficher sur le site web officiel de la Commission européenne la position de celle-ci.
Note, ce message a été supprimé (voir lien à la fin)

La directive sur le droit d'auteur : comment a-t-on dit à la foule de sauver le dragon et de tuer le chevalier ?

#Copyright #EU #Commission

Pour ceux d'entre vous qui ne connaissent ni ne se soucient de ce qu'est la directive sur le droit d'auteur ni des articles qu'elle contient, regardez ailleurs maintenant.

Faites ce test : Tapez'Directive de l'UE sur le droit d'auteur' dans la boîte de recherche sur Youtube. La majorité des résultats dans le top 20 sera passionnément contre elle. Voici quelques unes des manchettes, si vous n'êtes pas sûr :
"Mise à jour choquante sur la directive sur le droit d'auteur. Aujourd'hui, l'Europe a perdu l'Internet''Comment les nouvelles lois sur le droit d'auteur vont détruire l'Internet''Machines de censure','L'UE pour mettre fin à l'Internet' ou'L'Europe pour interdire tous les mèmes'.

Bien sûr, nous savons, d'après les élections et les référendums récents, que de simples slogans mémorables - même s'ils sont faux ou impossibles à obtenir - peuvent faire beaucoup pour gagner les cœurs, les esprits et les électeurs. C'est ainsi que les expressions totalement inexactes "taxes de lien" et "machines à censurer" ont commencé à faire partie de la campagne contre la proposition de directive sur le droit d'auteur. Ne laissez jamais la vérité faire obstacle à un slogan accrocheur.

L'idée qui sous-tend la directive est d'introduire les règles du droit d'auteur dans le XXIe siècle. Les règles actuelles sont très analogiques et conçues pour le monde avant le web. Les choses ont changé. Les plateformes de recherche et de médias sociaux définissent en grande partie la façon dont nous apprécions le contenu aujourd'hui, mais leur domination du marché a maintenant fait pencher la balance en leur faveur et éloigné de ceux qui conçoivent et créent des objets originaux.

En l'état actuel des choses, les grandes plateformes Internet telles que Facebook ou Google gagnent beaucoup d'argent grâce aux publicités qui apparaissent sur leurs sites à côté de matériel protégé par le droit d'auteur comme la musique ou les clips. Plus les gens regardent, plus les plateformes peuvent gagner de l'argent grâce à ces publicités.

Tout comme Google et Facebook sont récompensés financièrement pour leur travail acharné dans la production de logiciels étonnants, d'algorithmes intelligents et de designs passionnants, nous pensons que les auteurs, cinéastes, journalistes et musiciens devraient également être récompensés pour leurs efforts. À l'heure actuelle, l'équilibre du pouvoir en ce qui concerne le paiement de ces redevances repose en grande partie sur les grandes sociétés californiennes, dont la valeur est d'environ 1 billion de dollars.

La directive sur le droit d'auteur vise à créer des conditions de concurrence équitables permettant à chacun de profiter des options étonnantes qu'offrent les nouvelles technologies. Les musiciens, les artistes, les producteurs vidéo et l'ensemble du secteur créatif bénéficieront d'une position de négociation plus juste.

Néanmoins, il semble que les plus grandes plateformes de recherche et de vidéo au monde aient peur de la réglementation - malgré une domination écrasante sur Internet.

En outre, il existe de nombreuses preuves provenant de sources respectées, ici et ici et ici et peut-être ici ou ici ou encore ici ou même ici que la "grande technologie" a même "créé" des campagnes populaires contre la directive sur le droit d'auteur afin de donner l'impression que l'UE agit contre la "volonté du peuple".

C'est un autre mythe. Contrairement à Google et Facebook, l'UE est responsable devant le public et les politiciens démocratiquement élus. Les États membres - par le biais du marché unique numérique - visent à rendre plus facile et moins cher pour les consommateurs et les entreprises européens la navigation, le commerce, les études et le travail numériques dans l'UE.

Comme pour la plupart des législations de l'UE, le texte doit être approuvé par la majorité des Etats membres et voté par les eurodéputés au Parlement européen.

Donc, la prochaine fois que vous recevez un message sponsorisé sur votre calendrier, qui dit quelque chose comme "l'UE tuera le World Wide Web tel que nous le connaissons", arrêtez-vous, faites une pause et réfléchissez un instant. Demandez-vous : Cui Bono ? Qui profite réellement de ce message ou de cette campagne négative plus large ?

Est-ce que Google, Facebook ou d'autres ont vraiment besoin de payer pour convaincre ?

Sommes-nous dans un monde où les gens ordinaires se rangent du côté du dragon de feu contre le chevalier avec un bouclier bleu et jaune ?


[attachment type='link' url='https://web.archive.org/web/20190216094123/https://medium.com/@EuropeanCommission/the-copyright-directive-how-the-mob-was-told-to-save-the-dragon-and-slay-the-knight-b35876008f16' title='The Copyright Directive: how the mob was told to save the dragon and slay the knight' image='https://web.archive.org/web/20190216094123im_/https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/focal/1200/632/49/77/1*Qc1eJ0X1VZTKc6AUyVCyKQ.jpeg']Next time, when you get a sponsored message on your timeline, which says something like ‘the EU will kill the world wide web as we know…[/attachment]


 
#Copyright #EU #Commission
Post nel sito ufficiale della Commissione europea che esprime la sua posizione.
Nota, questo post è stato cancellato (vedi link alla fine)

https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2019/02/20/copyright-il-giallo-del-post-della-commissione-ue-sul-drago-sputafuoco/4982111/

La direttiva sul diritto d'autore: come si diceva alla folla di salvare il drago e uccidere il cavaliere

Per quelli di voi che non sanno né si preoccupano di cosa sia la direttiva sul diritto d'autore né di alcuno degli articoli in essa contenuti, guardate altrove.

Fate questo test: Digita "Direttiva UE sul diritto d'autore" nella casella di ricerca su Youtube. La maggior parte dei risultati nei primi 20 classificati sarà contro di essa con passione. Ecco alcuni dei titoli, se non vi fidate:
"Aggiornamento scioccante sulla direttiva sul diritto d'autore" "Oggi l'Europa ha perso Internet" "Come le nuove leggi sul diritto d'autore distruggeranno Internet", "Macchine per la censura", "L'UE sta per porre fine a Internet" o "L'Europa per vietare tutti i meme".

Naturalmente, sappiamo dalle recenti elezioni e dai referendum che semplici slogan memorabili - per quanto falsi o irraggiungibili - possono fare molta strada per conquistare cuori, menti ed elettori. E così è stato, che le frasi del tutto imprecise 'link taxes' e 'macchine per la censura' hanno iniziato a far parte della campagna contro la proposta di direttiva sul diritto d'autore. Non lasciare che la verità non si metta mai in mezzo a uno slogan accattivante.

L'idea alla base della direttiva è quella di introdurre le norme sul diritto d'autore nel XXI secolo. Le norme attuali sono molto analogiche e progettate per il mondo prima del web. Le cose sono cambiate. Le piattaforme di ricerca e i social media definiscono in larga misura il modo in cui godiamo dei contenuti oggi, ma la loro posizione dominante sul mercato ha rovesciato l'equilibrio a loro favore e lontano da coloro che progettano e creano cose originali.

Allo stato attuale, le grandi piattaforme internet come Facebook o Google guadagnano molto denaro dagli annunci pubblicitari che appaiono sui loro siti insieme a materiale protetto da copyright come musica o clip. Più persone vedono, più piattaforme di denaro possono guadagnare da questi annunci.

Così come Google e Facebook vengono ricompensati finanziariamente per tutto il loro duro lavoro nella produzione di software stupefacente, algoritmi intelligenti e progetti interessanti, pensiamo che autori, registi, giornalisti e musicisti dovrebbero essere ricompensati anche per i loro sforzi. Al momento l'equilibrio di potere in chi viene pagato per queste royalties risiede in larga misura nelle grandi compagnie californiane - che valgono circa un trilione di dollari.

La direttiva sul diritto d'autore è un tentativo di creare condizioni di parità di condizioni in cui tutti possono trarre vantaggio dalle straordinarie opzioni che le nuove tecnologie offrono. Musicisti, artisti, produttori di video e l'intero settore creativo beneficeranno di una posizione negoziale più equa.

Tuttavia, sembra che le più grandi piattaforme di ricerca e di video del mondo abbiano paura della regolamentazione, nonostante la schiacciante posizione dominante su Internet.

Inoltre, vi sono ampie prove da fonti autorevoli, qui e qui e forse qui o qui o qui o addirittura qui, che la "grande tecnologia" ha persino "creato" campagne di base contro la direttiva sul diritto d'autore per farla sembrare e suonare come se l'UE agisse contro la "volontà del popolo".

Questo è un altro mito. A differenza di Google e Facebook, l'UE è responsabile nei confronti del pubblico e dei politici democraticamente eletti. Gli Stati membri - attraverso il mercato unico digitale - mirano a rendere più facile ed economico per i consumatori e le imprese europee navigare, commerciare, studiare e lavorare in digitale nell'UE.

Come per la maggior parte della legislazione europea, il testo deve essere approvato dalla maggioranza degli Stati membri e votato dai deputati al Parlamento europeo.

Così la prossima volta, quando riceverai un messaggio sponsorizzato sulla tua timeline, che dice qualcosa come "l'UE ucciderà il world wide web come lo conosciamo", fermatevi, fermatevi, fermatevi e prendete in considerazione per un momento. Chiediti: Cui Prodest? Chi trae realmente beneficio da questo messaggio o da questa più ampia campagna negativa?

Google, Facebook o altri hanno davvero bisogno di pagare per convincere?

Siamo in un mondo in cui la gente comune si schiera con il drago che respira il fuoco contro il cavaliere con uno scudo blu e giallo?

https://medium.com/@EuropeanCommission/the-copyright-directive-how-the-mob-was-told-to-save-the-dragon-and-slay-the-knight-b35876008f16" target="_blank">https://web.archive.org/web/20190216094123/https://medium.com/@EuropeanCommission/the-copyright-directive-how-the-mob-was-told-to-save-the-dragon-and-slay-the-knight-b35876008f16


 
European Commission say in its site (link at the bottom):
third post (final post?)
#Copyright #EU #Commission

This article published by the Commission services was intended to reply to concerns, but also to misinterpretations that often surround the copyright directive proposal.

We acknowledge that its language and title were not appropriate and we apologise for the fact that it has been seen as offending.

That is why we removed this article from our Medium account.


 
European Commission say in its site (link at the bottom):
Second post
#Copyright #EU #Commission

We have removed this article as it has been understood in a way that doesn’t reflect the Commission’s position.


 
European Commission say in its site (link at the bottom):
First post
#Copyright #EU #Commission

The Copyright Directive: how the mob was told to save the dragon and slay the knight

For those of you, who don’t know nor care about what the Copyright Directive is nor any of the articles within it, look away now.

Take this test: Type in ‘EU Copyright Directive’ into the search box in Youtube. The majority of results in the top 20 will be passionately against it. Here’s some of the headlines, if you’re not sure:
‘Shocking update on the Copyright Directive.’ ‘Today Europe lost the Internet’ ‘How the new copyright laws will destroy the internet’ ‘Censorship machines’, ‘EU to end the internet’ or ‘Europe to ban all memes’

Of course, we know from recent elections and referendums that simple memorable slogans — however untrue or unobtainable — can go a long way to winning over hearts, minds and voters. And so it was, that the wholly inaccurate phrases ‘ link taxes ’ and ‘ censorship machines ’ started to be part of the campaign against the proposed Copyright Directive. Never let the truth get in the way of a catchy slogan.

The idea behind the Directive is to bring copyright rules into the 21st century. The current rules are very analogue and designed for the world before the web. Things have changed. Search and social media platforms largely define the way we enjoy content today, but their market dominance has now tilted the balance in their favour and away from those who design and create original things.

As it stands, big internet platforms such as Facebook or Google make a lot of money from ads that appear on their sites alongside copyrighted material such as music or clips. The more people view, the more money platforms can earn from those adverts.

Just as Google and Facebook are being rewarded financially for all their hard work in producing amazing software, clever algorithms and exciting designs, we think authors, film-makers, journalists and musicians should also be rewarded for their endeavours too. At the moment the balance of power in who gets paid for such royalties resides overwhelmingly with the big Californian companies — who are worth around $1 Trillion.

The Copyright Directive is an attempt to create a level playing field where everyone can gain from the amazing options that the new technologies offer. Musicians, artists, video producers and the whole creative sector will benefit by having a fairer negotiating position.

Nonetheless, it appears as if the largest search and video platforms in the world are afraid of regulation — despite having overwhelming dominance on the internet.

Furthermore, there is ample evidence from respected sources, here and here and perhaps here or here or indeed here that ‘Big Technology’ has even ‘created’ grassroots campaigns against the Copyright Directive in order to make it look and sound as if the EU is acting against the ‘will of the people’.

That’s another myth. Unlike Google and Facebook, the EU is answerable to the public and to democratically elected politicians. Member states — through the Digital Single market — aim to make it easier and cheaper for European consumers and companies to surf, trade, study and work digitally in the EU.

As with most EU legislation, the text must be agreed by a majority of member states and voted upon by MEPs in the European Parliament.

So next time, when you get a sponsored message on your timeline, which says something like ‘the EU will kill the world wide web as we know it’, stop, pause and consider for a moment. Ask yourself: Cui Bono? Who really benefits from this message or this wider negative campaign?

Do Google, Facebook or others really need to pay to persuade?

Are we in a world where ordinary people side with the fire breathing dragon against the knight with a blue and yellow shield?
European Commission
Official Medium account of @EU_Commission | Stories, posts and articles about our work in different areas.

[attachment type='link' url='https://web.archive.org/web/20190216094123/https://medium.com/@EuropeanCommission/the-copyright-directive-how-the-mob-was-told-to-save-the-dragon-and-slay-the-knight-b35876008f16' title='The Copyright Directive: how the mob was told to save the dragon and slay the knight' image='https://web.archive.org/web/20190216094123im_/https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/focal/1200/632/49/77/1*Qc1eJ0X1VZTKc6AUyVCyKQ.jpeg']Next time, when you get a sponsored message on your timeline, which says something like ‘the EU will kill the world wide web as we know…[/attachment]


 

The Final Version of the EU's Copyright Directive Is the Worst One Yet | Electronic Frontier Foundation


#internet #copyright #copywrong #capital #idiots #eu #art #science #broken


 

The Final Version of the EU's Copyright Directive Is the Worst One Yet | Electronic Frontier Foundation


#internet #copyright #copywrong #capital #idiots #eu #art #science #broken


 
Just wrote a letter to Members of European Parliament from six countries asking them to reject Article 13. Two of them host my projects and I just like other four. I honestly believe things like Copyright Directive have global impact no matter where you live. You can write your own letter.

It is a bit too long and certainly not perfect.
Subj: Concerning Copyright Reform and Article 13

Dear Member of the European Parliament!

To make things clear from the start - I am not one of your constituents as I live in Russia. However recent developments concerning Article 13 of the copyright Directive will have global impact which will also directly affect me so I decided to reach out.

You are probably aware of the critique of Article 13. While these proposals might be acceptable to large platforms they will decimate smaller social services because the cost of implementing upload filters will be prohibitive. Also these technologies will have to be outsourced to existing Big Data giants (mostly US based corporations) which will not just raise costs but also affect independence of social services forced to use them.

But I am pretty sure you are already aware of all that.

What I am more worried about is the precedent EU is about to create. Let me be frank - these days EU is beacon of progress and humanitarian rights. When it comes to freedom, privacy, social rights the world looks at you. Article 13 goes against these values. If it gets implemented governments of the rest of the world will see it as a green light to follow with even harder censorship and other restrictions of freedom of speech and expression. And they will already have the technology pioneered by Article 13 compliance - which won't be working good, which will misfire, which will be expensive and most likely under control of corporations like Google and Facebook. And as recent history of my country shows - if there is a restrictive control tool in place, it will be misused at one point or another.

Also there will be economic consequences for European IT companies. Right now a lot of projects are hosted in EU because of legal stability and respect of human rights Europe provides. With Article 13 in place it will change and these projects will move out to minimize potential liability. I am hosting two Internet projects in EU space myself, one in Germany and one in Italy. Please think what makes European hosting companies different from the rest. Also consider the fact that currently there is very little pirated material openly hosted by them - EU companies are known for low tolerance for piracy.

Please consider the overwhelming amount of critique towards Article 13. A good selection of points is here: https://saveyourinternet.eu/statements/

As a part of World Wide Web community I ask you to reject Article 13 of the copyright Directive.

Sincerely Yours,
Alexander
#article13 #EU #copyrightreform #CensorshipMachine #SaveYourInternet #digitalresistance #copyright #privacy #freedom #activism
Breaking: The text of Article 13 and the EU Copyright Directive has just been finalised


 

European Copyright Reform: Article 13 puts alternative social networks at risk


If you live in the European Union, you have probably heard about the planned European Copyright Reform, and you are probably aware of its controversial Article 13.

The so-called Proposal for a Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market intends to introduce new regulations around copyright. Article 13 would add new liability rules for online content-sharing service providers. While previously, providers could act on content that infringed copyright upon receiving a notice, the proposed regulations would render providers accountable for content as soon as it has been uploaded.

Effectively, this would put providers into a position where they have to implement strict upload filters to prevent users from uploading content that may infringe on someone else's copyright. This is dangerous, and it puts free speech, the diversity of opinions, and the internet as a whole at risk.

Article 13 previously contained rules to exclude platforms younger than three years, generating revenue of less than €10 million or with fewer than 5 million active users. Last week, however, a new draft was published, and the proposal now only excludes platforms matching all three of those conditions.

This is shocking. If Article 13 became a reality, everyone who operates a platform for users to publish content for more than three years would be 100% liable for everything happening on that platform, including content the operators are not even aware of. This makes operating an alternative social network effectively impossible.

For more details about the planned copyright reform, and information on how you can help, please check out saveyourinternet.eu. This does not concern just diaspora\* or your other favorite alternative social network. This concerns everyone. This is about health of the internet. Please #SaveYourInternet and fight against the #CensorshipMachine.

For reference, you will find below an open letter from diappora\* core team member Dennis Schubert, sent to those members of the European Parliament who currently support Article 13.
Dear Member of the European Parliament

The proposed Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market has been the topic of discussions for many months now. In spite of many debates on this matter, not much progress has been made to address concerns of many respected experts, including many NGOs and even the United Nations' Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, David Kaye[1]. According to my information, you are in the group of members of the European Parliament currently in favour of supporting this proposal, which is why I am reaching out to you to request you to reconsider the proposal, and especially consider the impact Article 13 will have on the Internet.

I am writing to you as a citizen of the European Union, but I am also reaching out to represent the many users and engineers behind alternative social networks. I am the project lead of diaspora*[2], an alternative, distributed social network based on free and open-source software. Together with similar projects such as Mastodon and Friendica, the world of alternative social media reaches over 2.5 million users on more than 4000 servers, including citizens who are part of your constituency.

Until now, the European Union has been seen as the epicentre of many efforts to build and maintain alternatives to large networks such as Facebook and Twitter. Many of these projects, their developers, and users are citizens of the European Union, and our projects enjoy great popularity among people as they are seen as privacy-friendly, local alternatives to the large systems built by American corporations. On many occasions in the past, European Union legislation has supported these projects and their principles, for instance with the recently implemented General Data Protection Regulation [4]to ensure high levels of data privacy for EU citizens.

Unfortunately, the planned copyright reform, and especially Article 13, will have an effect exactly opposite to supporting such projects and efforts.

The upload filters both explicitly described in and implied by the text on which you will be voting would force all online platforms to rely on technologies known to be error-prone, intrusive and legally questionable[5]. The proposal intends to hold providers of online platforms accountable for all content uploaded by users as soon as they have been published, contrary to the "notice and takedown" procedure currently in place, which allows providers to remove offending content upon receiving notice without the fear of legal repercussions.

For large platforms like Twitter and YouTube, this change would result in the implementation of stricter upload filters. Due to the technical natures of such systems and the strict liability regulations, those systems will be designed to block "too much", because blocking "too little" would put the provider at risk. Such over-cautious filters are a danger for users' freedom of speech, the diversity of opinions and creativity on the entire Internet, and would limit EU citizens' rights substantially.

Implementing Article 13 in its current form would be the end for smaller platforms and projects, as well as small and medium-sized businesses working on these or similar projects. Although in a previous revision of the proposal, platforms younger than three years, with revenue of less than €10 million, or with fewer than 5 million monthly active users would be excluded, a recent revision of the proposal now only excludes projects that meet all three of these conditions. For projects like diaspora*, which is significantly older than three years, this decision would result in all operators being responsible for every action their users do.

Non-profit projects like diaspora* are developed and maintained by people working voluntarily. Operators of servers running these software projects run those because they deem privacy important and want to provide an alternative to the large networks. They do not earn any money by doing this. The development, embedding and maintenance of infrastructure needed to filter copyright violations automatically requires a lot of resources, and implementing such solutions would thus simply be impossible.

If Article 13 became a reality, these projects and companies would not be able to comply with the new laws, so they could either cease to provide their services to European citizens and move their operations to a country outside the EU or stop their activities altogether. For Europe, especially as a community for strong privacy principles and independent, alternative solutions, this would be a huge step backwards and would make the established large networks, which quite regularly violate European principles, even more powerful.

With this, I am asking you to reject Article 13 of the Copyright Directive and to support all citizens who raise their voice for a free, open and diverse Internet.

Please do not use your vote to destroy the Internet.

Thank you.

Sincerely yours,

Dennis Schubert

[1]: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Opinion/Legislation/OL-OTH-41-2018.pdf
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaspora_(software)
[3]: https://the-federation.info/
[4]: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02016R0679-20160504
[5]: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/571681753c44d835a440c8b5/t/58d058712994ca536bbfa47a/1490049138881/FilteringPaperWebsite.pdf

Standalone Open letter, English Version: https://schub.io/txt/europarl-article13-en.html
Standalone Open letter, German Version: https://schub.io/txt/europarl-article13-de.html
#diaspora #privacy #copyright #europe #article13
Home


 

European Copyright Reform: Article 13 puts alternative social networks at risk


If you live in the European Union, you have probably heard about the planned European Copyright Reform, and you are probably aware of its controversial Article 13.

The so-called Proposal for a Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market intends to introduce new regulations around copyright. Article 13 would add new liability rules for online content-sharing service providers. While previously, providers could act on content that infringed copyright upon receiving a notice, the proposed regulations would render providers accountable for content as soon as it has been uploaded.

Effectively, this would put providers into a position where they have to implement strict upload filters to prevent users from uploading content that may infringe on someone else's copyright. This is dangerous, and it puts free speech, the diversity of opinions, and the internet as a whole at risk.

Article 13 previously contained rules to exclude platforms younger than three years, generating revenue of less than €10 million or with fewer than 5 million active users. Last week, however, a new draft was published, and the proposal now only excludes platforms matching all three of those conditions.

This is shocking. If Article 13 became a reality, everyone who operates a platform for users to publish content for more than three years would be 100% liable for everything happening on that platform, including content the operators are not even aware of. This makes operating an alternative social network effectively impossible.

For more details about the planned copyright reform, and information on how you can help, please check out saveyourinternet.eu. This does not concern just diaspora\* or your other favorite alternative social network. This concerns everyone. This is about health of the internet. Please #SaveYourInternet and fight against the #CensorshipMachine.

For reference, you will find below an open letter from diappora\* core team member Dennis Schubert, sent to those members of the European Parliament who currently support Article 13.
Dear Member of the European Parliament

The proposed Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market has been the topic of discussions for many months now. In spite of many debates on this matter, not much progress has been made to address concerns of many respected experts, including many NGOs and even the United Nations' Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, David Kaye[1]. According to my information, you are in the group of members of the European Parliament currently in favour of supporting this proposal, which is why I am reaching out to you to request you to reconsider the proposal, and especially consider the impact Article 13 will have on the Internet.

I am writing to you as a citizen of the European Union, but I am also reaching out to represent the many users and engineers behind alternative social networks. I am the project lead of diaspora*[2], an alternative, distributed social network based on free and open-source software. Together with similar projects such as Mastodon and Friendica, the world of alternative social media reaches over 2.5 million users on more than 4000 servers, including citizens who are part of your constituency.

Until now, the European Union has been seen as the epicentre of many efforts to build and maintain alternatives to large networks such as Facebook and Twitter. Many of these projects, their developers, and users are citizens of the European Union, and our projects enjoy great popularity among people as they are seen as privacy-friendly, local alternatives to the large systems built by American corporations. On many occasions in the past, European Union legislation has supported these projects and their principles, for instance with the recently implemented General Data Protection Regulation [4]to ensure high levels of data privacy for EU citizens.

Unfortunately, the planned copyright reform, and especially Article 13, will have an effect exactly opposite to supporting such projects and efforts.

The upload filters both explicitly described in and implied by the text on which you will be voting would force all online platforms to rely on technologies known to be error-prone, intrusive and legally questionable[5]. The proposal intends to hold providers of online platforms accountable for all content uploaded by users as soon as they have been published, contrary to the "notice and takedown" procedure currently in place, which allows providers to remove offending content upon receiving notice without the fear of legal repercussions.

For large platforms like Twitter and YouTube, this change would result in the implementation of stricter upload filters. Due to the technical natures of such systems and the strict liability regulations, those systems will be designed to block "too much", because blocking "too little" would put the provider at risk. Such over-cautious filters are a danger for users' freedom of speech, the diversity of opinions and creativity on the entire Internet, and would limit EU citizens' rights substantially.

Implementing Article 13 in its current form would be the end for smaller platforms and projects, as well as small and medium-sized businesses working on these or similar projects. Although in a previous revision of the proposal, platforms younger than three years, with revenue of less than €10 million, or with fewer than 5 million monthly active users would be excluded, a recent revision of the proposal now only excludes projects that meet all three of these conditions. For projects like diaspora*, which is significantly older than three years, this decision would result in all operators being responsible for every action their users do.

Non-profit projects like diaspora* are developed and maintained by people working voluntarily. Operators of servers running these software projects run those because they deem privacy important and want to provide an alternative to the large networks. They do not earn any money by doing this. The development, embedding and maintenance of infrastructure needed to filter copyright violations automatically requires a lot of resources, and implementing such solutions would thus simply be impossible.

If Article 13 became a reality, these projects and companies would not be able to comply with the new laws, so they could either cease to provide their services to European citizens and move their operations to a country outside the EU or stop their activities altogether. For Europe, especially as a community for strong privacy principles and independent, alternative solutions, this would be a huge step backwards and would make the established large networks, which quite regularly violate European principles, even more powerful.

With this, I am asking you to reject Article 13 of the Copyright Directive and to support all citizens who raise their voice for a free, open and diverse Internet.

Please do not use your vote to destroy the Internet.

Thank you.

Sincerely yours,

Dennis Schubert

[1]: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Opinion/Legislation/OL-OTH-41-2018.pdf
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaspora_(software)
[3]: https://the-federation.info/
[4]: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02016R0679-20160504
[5]: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/571681753c44d835a440c8b5/t/58d058712994ca536bbfa47a/1490049138881/FilteringPaperWebsite.pdf

Standalone Open letter, English Version: https://schub.io/txt/europarl-article13-en.html
Standalone Open letter, German Version: https://schub.io/txt/europarl-article13-de.html
#diaspora #privacy #copyright #europe #article13
Home


 

European Copyright Reform: Article 13 puts alternative social networks at risk


If you live in the European Union, you have probably heard about the planned European Copyright Reform, and you are probably aware of its controversial Article 13.

The so-called Proposal for a Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market intends to introduce new regulations around copyright. Article 13 would add new liability rules for online content-sharing service providers. While previously, providers could act on content that infringed copyright upon receiving a notice, the proposed regulations would render providers accountable for content as soon as it has been uploaded.

Effectively, this would put providers into a position where they have to implement strict upload filters to prevent users from uploading content that may infringe on someone else's copyright. This is dangerous, and it puts free speech, the diversity of opinions, and the internet as a whole at risk.

Article 13 previously contained rules to exclude platforms younger than three years, generating revenue of less than €10 million or with fewer than 5 million active users. Last week, however, a new draft was published, and the proposal now only excludes platforms matching all three of those conditions.

This is shocking. If Article 13 became a reality, everyone who operates a platform for users to publish content for more than three years would be 100% liable for everything happening on that platform, including content the operators are not even aware of. This makes operating an alternative social network effectively impossible.

For more details about the planned copyright reform, and information on how you can help, please check out saveyourinternet.eu. This does not concern just diaspora\* or your other favorite alternative social network. This concerns everyone. This is about health of the internet. Please #SaveYourInternet and fight against the #CensorshipMachine.

For reference, you will find below an open letter from diappora\* core team member Dennis Schubert, sent to those members of the European Parliament who currently support Article 13.
Dear Member of the European Parliament

The proposed Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market has been the topic of discussions for many months now. In spite of many debates on this matter, not much progress has been made to address concerns of many respected experts, including many NGOs and even the United Nations' Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, David Kaye[1]. According to my information, you are in the group of members of the European Parliament currently in favour of supporting this proposal, which is why I am reaching out to you to request you to reconsider the proposal, and especially consider the impact Article 13 will have on the Internet.

I am writing to you as a citizen of the European Union, but I am also reaching out to represent the many users and engineers behind alternative social networks. I am the project lead of diaspora*[2], an alternative, distributed social network based on free and open-source software. Together with similar projects such as Mastodon and Friendica, the world of alternative social media reaches over 2.5 million users on more than 4000 servers, including citizens who are part of your constituency.

Until now, the European Union has been seen as the epicentre of many efforts to build and maintain alternatives to large networks such as Facebook and Twitter. Many of these projects, their developers, and users are citizens of the European Union, and our projects enjoy great popularity among people as they are seen as privacy-friendly, local alternatives to the large systems built by American corporations. On many occasions in the past, European Union legislation has supported these projects and their principles, for instance with the recently implemented General Data Protection Regulation [4]to ensure high levels of data privacy for EU citizens.

Unfortunately, the planned copyright reform, and especially Article 13, will have an effect exactly opposite to supporting such projects and efforts.

The upload filters both explicitly described in and implied by the text on which you will be voting would force all online platforms to rely on technologies known to be error-prone, intrusive and legally questionable[5]. The proposal intends to hold providers of online platforms accountable for all content uploaded by users as soon as they have been published, contrary to the "notice and takedown" procedure currently in place, which allows providers to remove offending content upon receiving notice without the fear of legal repercussions.

For large platforms like Twitter and YouTube, this change would result in the implementation of stricter upload filters. Due to the technical natures of such systems and the strict liability regulations, those systems will be designed to block "too much", because blocking "too little" would put the provider at risk. Such over-cautious filters are a danger for users' freedom of speech, the diversity of opinions and creativity on the entire Internet, and would limit EU citizens' rights substantially.

Implementing Article 13 in its current form would be the end for smaller platforms and projects, as well as small and medium-sized businesses working on these or similar projects. Although in a previous revision of the proposal, platforms younger than three years, with revenue of less than €10 million, or with fewer than 5 million monthly active users would be excluded, a recent revision of the proposal now only excludes projects that meet all three of these conditions. For projects like diaspora*, which is significantly older than three years, this decision would result in all operators being responsible for every action their users do.

Non-profit projects like diaspora* are developed and maintained by people working voluntarily. Operators of servers running these software projects run those because they deem privacy important and want to provide an alternative to the large networks. They do not earn any money by doing this. The development, embedding and maintenance of infrastructure needed to filter copyright violations automatically requires a lot of resources, and implementing such solutions would thus simply be impossible.

If Article 13 became a reality, these projects and companies would not be able to comply with the new laws, so they could either cease to provide their services to European citizens and move their operations to a country outside the EU or stop their activities altogether. For Europe, especially as a community for strong privacy principles and independent, alternative solutions, this would be a huge step backwards and would make the established large networks, which quite regularly violate European principles, even more powerful.

With this, I am asking you to reject Article 13 of the Copyright Directive and to support all citizens who raise their voice for a free, open and diverse Internet.

Please do not use your vote to destroy the Internet.

Thank you.

Sincerely yours,

Dennis Schubert

[1]: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Opinion/Legislation/OL-OTH-41-2018.pdf
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaspora_(software)
[3]: https://the-federation.info/
[4]: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02016R0679-20160504
[5]: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/571681753c44d835a440c8b5/t/58d058712994ca536bbfa47a/1490049138881/FilteringPaperWebsite.pdf

Standalone Open letter, English Version: https://schub.io/txt/europarl-article13-en.html
Standalone Open letter, German Version: https://schub.io/txt/europarl-article13-de.html
#diaspora #privacy #copyright #europe #article13
Home


 
In 2019 the European Union's #Copyright Directive is getting close to the final straight. Help the @fsfe@twitter.com to #SaveCodeShare, sign the open letter and talk to us at the booth:


 

How to Download the Books That Just Entered the Public Domain


Public Domain Day was yesterday, but you were probably hungover, so here’s how to download the tens of thousands of books that became legal to download for free in 2019.




Starting at midnight on January 1, tens of thousands of books (as well as movies, songs, and cartoons) entered the public domain, meaning that people can download, share, or repurpose these works for free and without retribution under US copyright law.

... ...
... ...

#free #books #ebooks #copyright #public-domain #download #INTERNETARCHIVE #HATHITRUST #GUTENBERGPROJECT


 

How to Download the Books That Just Entered the Public Domain


Public Domain Day was yesterday, but you were probably hungover, so here’s how to download the tens of thousands of books that became legal to download for free in 2019.




Starting at midnight on January 1, tens of thousands of books (as well as movies, songs, and cartoons) entered the public domain, meaning that people can download, share, or repurpose these works for free and without retribution under US copyright law.

... ...
... ...

#free #books #ebooks #copyright #public-domain #download #INTERNETARCHIVE #HATHITRUST #GUTENBERGPROJECT


 
Hello everybody, je suis #nouveauici - act 2
Pour les centres d’intérêts ça a déjà été fait dans la précédente publication, même si il y en a énormément d’autres.

Ça fait 4 jours que je fais des tests, lis les tutoriels, le Faq et les aides, que je regarde et me balade parmi vous.
#aide J’ai beaucoup de #question #questions par apport #photo #photos #photographie et #autre

@podmin@framasphere.org @Fla @Framasoft @Hārokku @...

  • Est-ce normal toutes ces miniatures des photos qui viennent parasiter la photo mise en évidence dans le «diaporama» de la galerie photo
    (voir capture en commentaire), ou est-ce encore mon ordinateur anticonformiste qui fait des siennes, en me proposant une vue dont lui seul a le secret ?
    On peut éventuellement défendre l’idée de ce choix d’aperçu par un concept artistique, mais c’est vraiment dommage et pas très pratique, pour ne pas dire moche … en fait si, je le dit c’est moche. 😇
    Est-ce que cet aperçu va rester comme ça ?

  • Qu’en est-il de la compression des photos à l’upload ?
    Doit-on réduire leur taille, les miennes sont en 6000x4000px - 300px/pouce, j’aimerais les publier dans cette qualité, est-ce que c'est susceptible de poser problèmes ?

  • Pourquoi est-il conseiller de supprimer les infos d’une photo, tels que marque d’appareil, lieu, auteur…?
    (je ne retrouve plus dans le flot d’info ou j’ai lu ça).

  • Est-il possible avec le system Makdown de publier une photo via l’onglet «image» en lui donnant un chemin local du style :
    images/dossier_images/nom_de_l_image.jpg, ou la seul possibilité de publier une image provenant de mon ordi est via l’icône «appareil photo» (que l’on ne retrouve pas pour les commentaires, ni dans la discutions privée) ?

  • Quelqu’un aurait un lien vers un site expliquant le Makdown complet en français mais pour les nuls, ayant effleuré du bout des doigts (juste des ongles) le html sur workpress, Makdown semble relativement simple mais je n'ai pas pour habitude de me surestimer.

  • Est-ce que les hashtags doivent être précis à la lettre/caractère près, ou y a-t-il une certaine souplesse ?
    Par exemple : #noise-rock et #noiserock ou #photo et #photos, est-ce pareil pour la recherche ?
    Existe-t-il un guide pour une utilisation intelligente et correcte des tags (genre pour les nuls aussi).

  • La majorité de mes photos sont prises en concert, est-ce un crime de mettre un lien vers la page Facebook des musiciens ?

  • J’avais aussi une question sur les émoticônes mais j’ai trouvé comment qu’on fait. 😎

  • J’ai remarqué que Framasphere* est un peu plus lent que Diaspora* et ça bug de temps en temps au lancement, y a-t-il une explication ? 

#


Je n’ai aucune compétence en codage/développement mais je me permets quand même quelques petites suggestions :
  • La possibilité de corriger les statuts et commentaires serait vraiment très utile.
  • Un traducteur aussi.
  • Pouvoir liker/marquer son accord sur les commentaires serait un plus.
  • La possibilité de ranger les photos en album serait vraiment, mais vraiment très cool.
  • Pouvoir regrouper les tags pour que, lors d’une recherche ponctuelle, ne voir que les publications qui comprennent au minimum la totalité des tags regroupés.
  • Il y a l’onglet «tags suivis», le top serait de rajouter un onglet, style «tags boycott», qui permettrait de filtrer ce que l’on ne veut pas voir dans son flux et qui prendrait le dessus sur les tags suivis.
    Par exemple #chat #cat #foot (non non, je n’ai pas choisi ceux-là par hasard, c’est juste pour dire de me faire quelques ennemis 😛).

#


Voilà, c’est tout (pour le moment), merci à tout le monde.


PS : Non je n’écris pas en inclusif, because, je trouve que c’est de la discrimination envers les malvoyants qui utilisent un narrateur audio pour lire
(Et hop, quelques ennemis de plus 😛).


Bonne année
Peace and Destroy
Immagine/foto


 
Hello everybody, je suis #nouveauici - act 2
Pour les centres d’intérêts ça a déjà été fait dans la précédente publication, même si il y en a énormément d’autres.

Ça fait 4 jours que je fais des tests, lis les tutoriels, le Faq et les aides, que je regarde et me balade parmi vous.
#aide J’ai beaucoup de #question #questions par apport #photo #photos #photographie et #autre

@podmin@framasphere.org @Fla @Framasoft @Hārokku @...

  • Est-ce normal toutes ces miniatures des photos qui viennent parasiter la photo mise en évidence dans le «diaporama» de la galerie photo
    (voir capture en commentaire), ou est-ce encore mon ordinateur anticonformiste qui fait des siennes, en me proposant une vue dont lui seul a le secret ?
    On peut éventuellement défendre l’idée de ce choix d’aperçu par un concept artistique, mais c’est vraiment dommage et pas très pratique, pour ne pas dire moche … en fait si, je le dit c’est moche. 😇
    Est-ce que cet aperçu va rester comme ça ?

  • Qu’en est-il de la compression des photos à l’upload ?
    Doit-on réduire leur taille, les miennes sont en 6000x4000px - 300px/pouce, j’aimerais les publier dans cette qualité, est-ce que c'est susceptible de poser problèmes ?

  • Pourquoi est-il conseiller de supprimer les infos d’une photo, tels que marque d’appareil, lieu, auteur…?
    (je ne retrouve plus dans le flot d’info ou j’ai lu ça).

  • Est-il possible avec le system Makdown de publier une photo via l’onglet «image» en lui donnant un chemin local du style :
    images/dossier_images/nom_de_l_image.jpg, ou la seul possibilité de publier une image provenant de mon ordi est via l’icône «appareil photo» (que l’on ne retrouve pas pour les commentaires, ni dans la discutions privée) ?

  • Quelqu’un aurait un lien vers un site expliquant le Makdown complet en français mais pour les nuls, ayant effleuré du bout des doigts (juste des ongles) le html sur workpress, Makdown semble relativement simple mais je n'ai pas pour habitude de me surestimer.

  • Est-ce que les hashtags doivent être précis à la lettre/caractère près, ou y a-t-il une certaine souplesse ?
    Par exemple : #noise-rock et #noiserock ou #photo et #photos, est-ce pareil pour la recherche ?
    Existe-t-il un guide pour une utilisation intelligente et correcte des tags (genre pour les nuls aussi).

  • La majorité de mes photos sont prises en concert, est-ce un crime de mettre un lien vers la page Facebook des musiciens ?

  • J’avais aussi une question sur les émoticônes mais j’ai trouvé comment qu’on fait. 😎

  • J’ai remarqué que Framasphere* est un peu plus lent que Diaspora* et ça bug de temps en temps au lancement, y a-t-il une explication ? 

#


Je n’ai aucune compétence en codage/développement mais je me permets quand même quelques petites suggestions :
  • La possibilité de corriger les statuts et commentaires serait vraiment très utile.
  • Un traducteur aussi.
  • Pouvoir liker/marquer son accord sur les commentaires serait un plus.
  • La possibilité de ranger les photos en album serait vraiment, mais vraiment très cool.
  • Pouvoir regrouper les tags pour que, lors d’une recherche ponctuelle, ne voir que les publications qui comprennent au minimum la totalité des tags regroupés.
  • Il y a l’onglet «tags suivis», le top serait de rajouter un onglet, style «tags boycott», qui permettrait de filtrer ce que l’on ne veut pas voir dans son flux et qui prendrait le dessus sur les tags suivis.
    Par exemple #chat #cat #foot (non non, je n’ai pas choisi ceux-là par hasard, c’est juste pour dire de me faire quelques ennemis 😛).

#


Voilà, c’est tout (pour le moment), merci à tout le monde.


PS : Non je n’écris pas en inclusif, because, je trouve que c’est de la discrimination envers les malvoyants qui utilisent un narrateur audio pour lire
(Et hop, quelques ennemis de plus 😛).


Bonne année
Peace and Destroy
Immagine/foto


 
It's almost 2019, which will bring the first new batch of US public domain works in over 20 years:

https://law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2019/

This "public domain day" used to happen every year until 1998, when 20 years was added to copyright terms for no real reason other than that large companies like Disney wanted it.

Copyright currently lasts 95 years in most countries, but until the late 1970s it was 56 years, or even shorter if copyright wasn't actively renewed.

#PublicDomainDay #Copyright
Immagine/foto


 

Where #EU member states stand on upload filters and the “link tax”


https://juliareda.eu/2018/10/where-eu-member-states-stand-on-upload-filters-and-the-link-tax/

#copyright #internet
Where EU member states stand on upload filters and the “link tax”


 

Another (and so far final) repost: EU copyright reform… Dear fellow Diasporians, please take action now.


(a near-copy from @itri's near-copy of my own recent post)

The vote on this is going to happen tomorrow, and, as I understand it, the new law will also affect networks like Diaspora, in fact many smaller sites and businesses.


(It affects "online services" that allow data to be uploaded and published... It will most probably affect federated networks like Diaspora or Peertube, all kinds of sites that deal with free and open software, probably also artists who want to upload their own work, maybe smaller e-mail providers, it might raise prices for getting one's own website hosted by a webspace provider etc etc...)

On https://saveyourinternet.eu/ you can act now, and write bulk or personal e-mails to members of parliament of your country (by only a few clicks). Please do!


Arguments against the implemented reform (taken from https://saveyourinternet.eu/):
  • Article 13 is bad for the Internet as a whole: … it “would mandate Internet platforms to embed an automated infrastructure for monitoring and censorship deep into their networks”.
  • Article 13 is bad for EU citizens’ fundamental rights: … it “would violate the freedom of expression set out in (…) the Charter of Fundamental Rights” and “provoke such legal uncertainty that online services will have no other option than to monitor, filter and block EU citizens’ communications”.near
  • Article 13 threatens legal certainty in the EU: … there is scientific consensus on the fact that Article 13 “threaten [s]the user participation benefits of the e-Commerce Directive (2000/31/EC)”.
  • Article 13 will be bad for the European economy: … “these rules are bad news for publishers who rely on an open and competitive internet to source, create and disseminate stories to their readers” … “the suggested filtering technology will raise the cost of launching a startup in Europe and drive talent away”.
  • The Parliament must promote a balanced and evidence-based approach to copyright enforcement and not fall into the trap of so-called ‘easy fixes’ to the detriment of our fundamental rights.

Call your MEP now and if you know others who are residents in the EU, tell them to call or write to their MEPs too.

You can find info on each of your MEPs on the SaveYourInternet.eu site, or on Parliament’s own site (just click on the maps).

If you’re outside of Europe, please consider sharing this blog post with your European friends and family and let them know that this is a red alert. We have just days until the vote.

Tell them to reject the Voss amendments, and reject Article 11 and 13, reject copyright filters, and reject ancillary rights on press snippets. Encourage your MEP to choose options that avoid filtering uploads or restricting links.


Here's a little about it that also hints on who would benefit from this new law.


(Youtube, 2:24 min)
#FOSS, #reform, #politics, #politik, #creativecommons, #cc, #legislation, #europa, #freedom, #freedom-of-speech, #fairuse, #fair-use, #link, #link-tax, #linktax, #freeweb, #free-web, #sharing, #uploading, #uploads, #version-control, #EU, #EU-copyright, #law, #copyright, #censorship, #savecodeshare, #open-source, #software, #software-development, #social, #Europe, #diaspora, #peertube, #thefederation, #federation, #the-federation, #fediverse, #internet, #web, #european-union, #europeanunion, #email, #irc, #laws, #law, #DeleteArt13, #xmpp, #jabber, #tax, #taxes, #Mastodon, #SaveYourInternet


 

Another (and so far final) repost: EU copyright reform… Dear fellow Diasporians, please take action now.


(a near-copy from @itri's near-copy of my own recent post)

The vote on this is going to happen tomorrow, and, as I understand it, the new law will also affect networks like Diaspora, in fact many smaller sites and businesses.


(It affects "online services" that allow data to be uploaded and published... It will most probably affect federated networks like Diaspora or Peertube, all kinds of sites that deal with free and open software, probably also artists who want to upload their own work, maybe smaller e-mail providers, it might raise prices for getting one's own website hosted by a webspace provider etc etc...)

On https://saveyourinternet.eu/ you can act now, and write bulk or personal e-mails to members of parliament of your country (by only a few clicks). Please do!


Arguments against the implemented reform (taken from https://saveyourinternet.eu/):
  • Article 13 is bad for the Internet as a whole: … it “would mandate Internet platforms to embed an automated infrastructure for monitoring and censorship deep into their networks”.
  • Article 13 is bad for EU citizens’ fundamental rights: … it “would violate the freedom of expression set out in (…) the Charter of Fundamental Rights” and “provoke such legal uncertainty that online services will have no other option than to monitor, filter and block EU citizens’ communications”.near
  • Article 13 threatens legal certainty in the EU: … there is scientific consensus on the fact that Article 13 “threaten [s]the user participation benefits of the e-Commerce Directive (2000/31/EC)”.
  • Article 13 will be bad for the European economy: … “these rules are bad news for publishers who rely on an open and competitive internet to source, create and disseminate stories to their readers” … “the suggested filtering technology will raise the cost of launching a startup in Europe and drive talent away”.
  • The Parliament must promote a balanced and evidence-based approach to copyright enforcement and not fall into the trap of so-called ‘easy fixes’ to the detriment of our fundamental rights.

Call your MEP now and if you know others who are residents in the EU, tell them to call or write to their MEPs too.

You can find info on each of your MEPs on the SaveYourInternet.eu site, or on Parliament’s own site (just click on the maps).

If you’re outside of Europe, please consider sharing this blog post with your European friends and family and let them know that this is a red alert. We have just days until the vote.

Tell them to reject the Voss amendments, and reject Article 11 and 13, reject copyright filters, and reject ancillary rights on press snippets. Encourage your MEP to choose options that avoid filtering uploads or restricting links.


Here's a little about it that also hints on who would benefit from this new law.


(Youtube, 2:24 min)
#FOSS, #reform, #politics, #politik, #creativecommons, #cc, #legislation, #europa, #freedom, #freedom-of-speech, #fairuse, #fair-use, #link, #link-tax, #linktax, #freeweb, #free-web, #sharing, #uploading, #uploads, #version-control, #EU, #EU-copyright, #law, #copyright, #censorship, #savecodeshare, #open-source, #software, #software-development, #social, #Europe, #diaspora, #peertube, #thefederation, #federation, #the-federation, #fediverse, #internet, #web, #european-union, #europeanunion, #email, #irc, #laws, #law, #DeleteArt13, #xmpp, #jabber, #tax, #taxes, #Mastodon, #SaveYourInternet


 

Reposting and reposting about the planned EU copyright reform... Dear Diasporians, please take action.

The vote on this is going to happen tomorrow, and the new law will also affect networks like Diaspora, in fact many smaller sites and businesses.

On https://saveyourinternet.eu/ you can act now, and write bulk or personal e-mails to members of parliament of your country.


Arguments against the implemented reform, taken from https://saveyourinternet.eu/ :
* Article 13 is bad for the Internet as a whole: ... it “would mandate Internet platforms to embed an automated infrastructure for monitoring and censorship deep into their networks”.
* Article 13 is bad for EU citizens’ fundamental rights: ... it “would violate the freedom of expression set out in (…) the Charter of Fundamental Rights” and “provoke such legal uncertainty that online services will have no other option than to monitor, filter and block EU citizens’ communications”.
* Article 13 threatens legal certainty in the EU: ... there is scientific consensus on the fact that Article 13 “threaten [s]the user participation benefits of the e-Commerce Directive (2000/31/EC)”.
* Article 13 will be bad for the European economy: ... “these rules are bad news for publishers who rely on an open and competitive internet to source, create and disseminate stories to their readers” ... “the suggested filtering technology will raise the cost of launching a startup in Europe and drive talent away”.
* The Parliament must promote a balanced and evidence-based approach to copyright enforcement and not fall into the trap of so-called ‘easy fixes’ to the detriment of our fundamental rights.

#FOSS, #reform, #politics, #politik, #creativecommons, #cc, #legislation, #europa, #freedom, #freedom-of-speech, #fairuse, #fair-use, #link, #link-tax, #linktax, #freeweb, #free-web, #sharing, #uploading, #uploads, #version-control, #EU, #EU-copyright, #law, #copyright, #censorship, #savecodeshare, #open-source, #software, #software-development, #social, #Europe, #diaspora, #thefederation, #federation, #the-federation, #fediverse, #internet, #web, #european-union, #europeanunion, #email, #irc, #laws, #law, #DeleteArt13, #xmpp, #jabber, #tax, #taxes, #Mastodon, #SaveYourInternet

Hashtags were taken from a post by @itri, thanks a lot.
Home


 

Devastating EU Copyright review - one day left to take action


^a^ ^near-copy^ ^of^ ^this^ ^@Blutpumpe's^ ^post^ [^here^](https://despora.de/posts/38f0408097e00136ed19543d7eeced27)^.^ ^Thanks^ ^for^ ^supporting^ ^the^ ^cause!^ ^(reposting^ ^for^ ^wider^ ^exposure)^

The vote on this is going to happen tomorrow, and the new law will also probably affect networks like Diaspora, and many smaller sites and businesses.

On https://saveyourinternet.eu/ you can act now, and write bulk or personal e-mails to members of parliament of your country.


Arguments against the implemented reform (taken from https://saveyourinternet.eu/):
  • Article 13 is bad for the Internet as a whole: … it “would mandate Internet platforms to embed an automated infrastructure for monitoring and censorship deep into their networks”.
  • Article 13 is bad for EU citizens’ fundamental rights: … it “would violate the freedom of expression set out in (…) the Charter of Fundamental Rights” and “provoke such legal uncertainty that online services will have no other option than to monitor, filter and block EU citizens’ communications”.
  • Article 13 threatens legal certainty in the EU: … there is scientific consensus on the fact that Article 13 “threaten [s]the user participation benefits of the e-Commerce Directive (2000/31/EC)”.
  • Article 13 will be bad for the European economy: … “these rules are bad news for publishers who rely on an open and competitive internet to source, create and disseminate stories to their readers” … “the suggested filtering technology will raise the cost of launching a startup in Europe and drive talent away”.
  • The Parliament must promote a balanced and evidence-based approach to copyright enforcement and not fall into the trap of so-called ‘easy fixes’ to the detriment of our fundamental rights.

Call your MEP now and if you know others who are residents in the EU, tell them to call or write to their MEPs too.

You can find info on each of your MEPs on the SaveYourInternet.eu site, or on Parliament’s own site (just click on the maps).

If you’re outside of Europe, please consider sharing this blog post with your European friends and family and let them know that this is a red alert. We have just days until the vote.

Tell them to reject the Voss amendments, and reject Article 11 and 13, reject copyright filters, and reject ancillary rights on press snippets. Encourage your MEP to choose options that avoid filtering uploads or restricting links.


#FOSS, #reform, #politics, #politik, #creativecommons, #cc, #legislation, #europa, #freedom, #freedom-of-speech, #fairuse, #fair-use, #link, #link-tax, #linktax, #freeweb, #free-web, #sharing, #uploading, #uploads, #version-control, #EU, #EU-copyright, #law, #copyright, #censorship, #savecodeshare, #open-source, #software, #software-development, #social, #Europe, #diaspora, #thefederation, #federation, #the-federation, #fediverse, #internet, #web, #european-union, #europeanunion, #email, #irc, #laws, #law, #DeleteArt13, #xmpp, #jabber, #tax, #taxes, #Mastodon, #SaveYourInternet


 
#Copyright #Wikipedia

Ho appena contattato un eurodeputato italiano e ho chiesto di appoggiare l'iniziativa #fixcopyright nell'Unione europea! Contatta gli eurodeputati da fixcopyright.wikimedia.org


 
How the #EU's #Copyright #Filters Will Make it #Trivial For #Anyone to #Censor the #Internet



On Wednesday, the EU will vote on whether to accept two controversial proposals in the new Copyright Directive; one of these clauses, Article 13, has the potential to allow anyone, anywhere in the world, to effect mass, rolling waves of censorship across the Internet.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/09/how-eus-copyright-filters-will-make-it-trivial-anyone-censor-internet