/g/ - Technology

install openbsd

[Make a Post]
[X]





Article 13 and the EU Copyright Directive has been finalized Nanonymous No.2562 [D][U][F][S][L][A][C] >>2563
File: b2986bb8e2090de720d309133522644ce58d151ef3a5a2ddd8c2e1a2303c5988.jpg (dl) (140.22 KiB)

What’s in the EU Copyright Directive
>Hot off the press, take a look at the final wording of Article 11 and Article 13. Here’s my summary:

Article 13: Upload filters
>Parliament negotiator Axel Voss accepted the deal between France and Germany I laid out in a recent blog post:
> Commercial sites and apps where users can post material must make “best efforts” to preemptively buy licences for anything that users may possibly upload – that is: all copyrighted content in the world. An impossible feat.
> In addition, all but very few sites (those both tiny and very new) will need to do everything in their power to prevent anything from ever going online that may be an unauthorised copy of a work that a rightsholder has registered with the platform. They will have no choice but to deploy upload filters, which are by their nature both expensive and error-prone.
> Should a court ever find their licensing or filtering efforts not fierce enough, sites are directly liable for infringements as if they had committed them themselves. This massive threat will lead platforms to over-comply with these rules to stay on the safe side, further worsening the impact on our freedom of speech.

Article 11: The “link tax”
>The final version of this extra copyright for news sites closely resembles the version that already failed in Germany – only this time not limited to search engines and news aggregators, meaning it will do damage to a lot more websites.
> Reproducing more than “single words or very short extracts” of news stories will require a licence. That will likely cover many of the snippets commonly shown alongside links today in order to give you an idea of what they lead to. We will have to wait and see how courts interpret what “very short” means in practice – until then, hyperlinking (with snippets) will be mired in legal uncertainty.
> No exceptions are made even for services run by individuals, small companies or non-profits, which probably includes any monetised blogs or websites.

Nanonymous No.2563 [D]

>>2562
Link to source: https://juliareda.eu/2019/02/eu-copyright-final-text/

Nanonymous No.2564 [D]

btw piracy is also illegal

Nanonymous No.2565 [D]

Clearnet subhumans blown the fuck out.

Nanonymous No.2566 [D] >>2567

>>2526
I hope this drives people to darknets. They need a fucking shove and this will hit the right in the ass.
(They can have Tor if we can keep I2P)

Nanonymous No.2567 [D] >>2572 >>2574

>>2566
>I hope this drives people to darknets.
If they did, the eu would start banning tor. I hear china is quite effective at this, I have no doubt the eu could do similarly. Britain's lucky to be getting out.

Nanonymous No.2568 [D] >>2574

The only thing that could compare to multinational corporations' incompliable regulations is the Soviet legal system. Keep on giving those capitalist bureaucrats more power, "leftists". Proud remainers WWU.

Nanonymous No.2569 [D] >>2574

lol@eurocucks
you'll eventually need to set up and run a private ssh tunnel in order to escape this kikery
or, a better alternative, gas your jews

Nanonymous No.2570 [D]

>(((They))) can't win the meme war
>Sorry about that censorsh..uhh (((copyright))) infringement goy

Nanonymous No.2571 [D] >>2574

We are in the era where politicians insult each other on twitter, but we still have to fight the copyright laws that are imposed by who knows who.
The press has less and less relevance, and if people stop publishing their links on social media, they are gone. Do they not learn about the past? There are plenty of examples (the most similar could be the spanish google news ban) to understand that it has never worked the way boomers imagine the internet.

I don't use twitter, reddit
and all that crap. It is not going to change my everyday life if they approve this law but holly fuck, how can they be so incompetent?

Nanonymous No.2572 [D]

>>2567
>Britain's lucky to be getting out
UK is way more orwellian than eu tho.

Nanonymous No.2573 [D]

Thank god I LARPed as an ebin hacker long enough to know how to evade any ban that could be imposed by the Jews.

Nanonymous No.2574 [D][U][F] >>2575
File: 0734fe7446d6a13c0cb19a7031feecccbb9e3c51c84492749a38c261fdea2605.png (dl) (57.35 KiB)

How does it affect me? I use vpn not based in europe for p2p and tor for everything else. If goyim won't get their daily dose of jewtube cancer why should I give a fuck? At least based newspapers will move to tor, if anything.
I see it as good news.
GOOD JOB EU
>>2567
>what is http://ea5faa5po25cf7fb.onion/projects/tor/wiki/doc/meek
>>2568
At least there were no legal problems getting weapons in communist bloc
>>2569
Jews are in america, we in europe have problems with whites(us), as always. The moment you give power to assholes you get this.
Making whites jews and vice versa is fuckin awful. When you can't deal in retarded absolutes then don't.
>>2571
>we are in the era where politicians insult each other on twitter, but we still have to fight the copyright laws that are imposed by who knows who
QUOTE OF THE DAY

Nanonymous No.2575 [D] >>2577 >>2578 >>2579

>>2574
>meek
Relies on bouncing traffic off of Amazon and Jewgle app engines. Those corporations are eager to comply with Western authorities, rather than the Eastern ones (psst, and that's why meek still works in China), so meek will be killed off before it gets dangerously popular.

Nanonymous No.2577 [D]

>>2575
...in Europe

Nanonymous No.2578 [D]

>>2575
Amazon and co have been threatened by china to shut down their tor services or potentially get their entire services blocked too, azure has complied for this reason a while ago too iirc

Nanonymous No.2579 [D] >>2580

>>2575
While what you are saying it's true, I doubt that tor project won't invent other way to obfuscate traffic. And obfs works in china too, I think. https://blog.torproject.org/closer-look-great-firewall-china not sure how relevant. And some chinese anon also pointed out that chinese use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freegate more than tor.
>The program takes advantage of a range of proxy servers called Dynaweb. This allows users to bypass Internet firewalls that block web sites by using DIT's Peer-to-peer (P2P)-like proxy network system.
What I'm saying is that everything can be circumvented as long as you have control over your own computer.
Btw I'm just stunned that there are no demonstrations against article 13 and eu copyright directive. It literally says that internet will be "closed" and not "open". FCC is based compared to eu.

Nanonymous No.2580 [D]

>>2579
>Freegate
Being proprietary and apparently employing exploits to penetrate Great Firewall of China most likely gives it an upper hand above Tor.

>DIT was founded in 2001 to provide email delivery services to China for U.S. government agencies and NGOs. In 2002, DIT started to provide anti-censorship services under the framework of DynaWeb, and like UltraSurf, DynaWeb became a top contender of the GFW-penetration effort.

>Freegate was created by Falun Gong practitioners and has been financed by the Broadcasting Board of Governors, a US governmental agency. Freegate also receives funding from Human Rights in China, which is also one of its clients and which receives some funding from the American non-profit organization the National Endowment for Democracy. According to a CRS report, the US government gave funding of $685,000 to Freegate in 2005.

>Broadcasting Board of Governors

I've seen this name somewhere before. This is the main propaganda agency within the US government to penetrate "non-democratic" nations (some with coincidentally large reserves of petroleum).

>According to a 2016 fact-sheet, BBG had a weekly, unduplicated audience of 226 million people through television, radio, and internet media. BBG networks broadcast in 100 countries and 61 languages.

It gives me the creeps every time.