EU law's Article 13 mandating everything being posted be put through copyright content recognition first

[Nikhil VJ]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Zik97_OcbM
The Biggest Threat To The Internet As We Know It | Article 13 -Stefan Molyneux, 2018-06-19

What I like about this video and this speaker is the connection of dots and analysis of patterns and schools of thoughts causing things rather than treating each and every such "new law coming up" as a one-off campaign. And his explanation of how purposefully creating vagueness in a law increases its power to censor and silence ordinary people while large corporations have enough lawyers to disregard them. That reminded me of the discussions on legalities regarding maps and govt data and stuff that we've had in Datameet. 

It's a controversial source so if you don't like this guy then please ignore him find some other source.. he did mention internet freedom orgs were also talking taking strong positions on this. Here's another article on it:

https://thenextweb.com/eu/2017/09/26/mozilla-exec-eus-copyright-reform-is-a-dysfunctional-proposal/

EU is voting on ‘dysfunctional’ copyright proposal October 10

There's one thing that really bothers me: 

1. If it was the exact same law,

2. With the same real world consequence of having all websites terminate any and all unmoderated posting (including this mailing list.. but hey maybe google or hey maybe they'll be quicker at reporting?) 

3. and having anything anyone ever posts mandated to be screened first by some or the other centralized authority for approval or possible prosecution 

4.that this law will ultimately translate to in real world terms as small sites can't afford huge recognition systems and so must outsource, 

5. which will translate to people stopping posting anything online entirely for fear of getting caught up in some or the other tangle,

6. but the reasoning given to justify it was to "stop hate speech" instead of stopping copyright violations, 

7. then would you support this legislation? 

8. Exact same law, exact same real world consequence of switching off instant interaction and possibility of getting prosecuted for posting or saying something, 

9. just the grand reason provided being different. 

10. What would be your position then? 

11. Does it bother anyone that two completely different reasons can be used to bring about exactly the same consequence? What if the other one's plan B?

PS: I put "stop hate speech" in quotes because I'm personally in disagreement with the narrative around it, it's irrelevant to this forum but hey that's why quotes.

--
Cheers,
Nikhil VJ
+91-966-583-1250
Pune, India
Website <http://nikhilvj.co.in>

DataMeet Pune chapter <https://datameet-pune.github.io/>
Self-designed learner at Swaraj University <http://www.swarajuniversity.org>

Payment / Contribute <https://nikhilvj.benow.in/pay>