Marisa Matias on new copyright directive: "It's not the end of the Internet. It is the end of freedom "

Marisa Matias on new copyright directive: "It's not the end of the Internet. It is the end of freedom "


Marisa Matias, Member of the Left Bloc (BE), considers that the new European copyright directive "is very dangerous", because it creates problems rather than solves them.

The statement was made during the meeting on the "European Reform of Copyright and Public Interest", which took place this Monday at the National Library of Portugal (BNP). The main topic discussed at this meeting did not escape much to what has been the topic of discussion not only between YouTubers, but also users of the great web in recent days: Articles 11.1 1 13.

Marisa Matias, from a video-call, expressed her opposition to the new directives, explaining that Articles 11 and 13 "promote censorship in what we consider to be an area of ​​freedom." "As platforms and social networks do not want to be held responsible for passing protected content, what they do is increasingly tighten free circulation to the point of not including third-party content. It is an attack that is the rights of users. We are all victims, "he said.

Article 13 limits the possibility of publishing content on platforms such as social networks because it obliges them to use Upload that can distinguish between legal and non-legal content. For example, under this article, any entity may prohibit the use of an image or a clip video to create a 'meme and platforms must automatically prevent such modified content from being published.

"Those who defend this legislation and article often say that filters have always existed (…). It may even be true, but it must be said that the filters were not legitimized as approved by the European Parliament. It is important to note that, by law, there is copyright protection. The introduction of this article only legitimized the use of filters in a massive way, "explained the MP of the BE.

Basically, this article comes to benefit creators, authors, creative artists, whose material is shared without permission. With this, there are those who understand that there is a possible battle between browsers and content creators since they do not receive well-deserved credits when unauthorized sharing of protected material is made. In the eyes of Marisa Matias, this protection "is fragile" and that in reality this new directive only protects the industry.

"I opposed the vote on Article 13 in July, and I opposed it again in September," said the deputy. "I will always keep against this legitimacy because the European Commission has seized this opportunity to legitimize censorship. It is not the end of the Internet. It's the end of freedom on the copyright protection hood, "he said, in the same video.

To join the wave of criticism of this article, and also present in the auditorium of BNP, came the professor of the Catholic University Tito Rendas, who after a brief explanation of the legal complexity that integrate in both directives, was totally against this article, in its form and substance, "which it considered" to lack the most elementary legal clarity ".

The Digital Rights Defense Association (D3) also attended and endorsed what had hitherto been discussed: "Copyright law has an impact on the various areas. For more justifications of good intentions that are made, the ends do not justify the means ", explained the leader of the association, Eduardo Santos.

On the other hand, representing the benefits of the article, Helena Martins of the Board of the Public Policy department of Google Portugal, says that the giant "supports the principles of Article 13. We want to promote a more secure creative ecosystem. " He mentioned the existence of the tool implemented in Yotube called "Content ID", which protects creators from any Upload made by third parties with content with unauthorized copyright. "Article 13 intends to do exactly the same: to protect the creator from unauthorized sharing of content. We are promoting a safe space on the web, "he explained.

On 12 December, at 4:30 p.m., a demonstration is scheduled against Article 13, in Lisbon, in Figueira Square. According to the statement sent to Lusa agency by the organization, this is "a protest against an article that runs counter to the ideals of freedom and free circulation of the Internet, but also of the European Union itself." "The existing mechanisms on platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, etc., already protect copyright and it is not possible to profit from content from others," says the organization.

From the debate in Brussels to the YorTubers

This legislative reform on copyright for the digital single market has been under discussion since 2016 but it was in September of this year that the European Parliament voted in favor of the proposal, to which 438 Members gave the go-ahead. The final text of the new directive will be evaluated in January 2019, and may still change, which did not prevent panic and discussion from increasing. The cause of this is due to the Portuguese youtuber Wuant, who published a video stating that if this law were approved, its channel on the platform would disappear.

The European Commission has already responded to the video, which has since become viral, and has assured all YouTubers that no channel on this platform would disappear. "Expensive AndorTubers, your videos will not be erased and your freedom of expression will not be limited. Article 13 is not addressed to youtubers and will not affect your channels, "explains the letter sent by those in Brussels.

While it has been ensured that these online video creators would break free of this new directive, the same can not be said of users of major platforms such as Facebook, Instagram or Twitter that confuse themselves with the possible 'upload filters'. That is, filters that restrict the sharing of copyrighted content.



Source link