Stop the Censorship Machines!

Video in TIB AV-Portal: Stop the Censorship Machines!

Formal Metadata

Stop the Censorship Machines!
How can we prevent mandatory upload filters in the E
Title of Series
CC Attribution - ShareAlike 3.0 Germany:
You are free to use, adapt and copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in adapted or unchanged form for any legal purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor and the work or content is shared also in adapted form only under the conditions of this license.
Release Date

Content Metadata

Subject Area
Upload filters are one of the biggest threats to an open and free internet. They choke freedom of expression, hurt creativity, and undermine our privacy. They damage things the EU and its Member States value very much and protect by law. And yet, mandatory upload filters are right now being proposed in the EU copyright reform. But it’s not over yet. Together with you we want to develop plans on how to raise awareness and stop what we call 'censorship machines'.
Metropolitan area network Digital filter Physical law Expression Open set CAN bus Process (computing) Computer animation Meeting/Interview Internetworking Table (information) Freeware Error message Form (programming)
Code Direction (geometry) Digitizing Expression Virtual machine Expert system Content (media) Coordinate system Streaming media Mass Shape (magazine) Hand fan Data management Roundness (object) Meeting/Interview Lecture/Conference Videoconferencing Hill differential equation Right angle Musical ensemble Freeware Computing platform Fundamental theorem of algebra Condition number
Filter <Stochastik> Identifiability Code Multiplication sign Ultraviolet photoelectron spectroscopy Virtual machine Mereology Information privacy Meeting/Interview Term (mathematics) Internetworking Ideal (ethics) Videoconferencing Authorization Computing platform Computer architecture Physical system Condition number Channel capacity Information Block (periodic table) Physical law Moment (mathematics) Expression Content (media) Library catalog Type theory Filtration Word Software Uniformer Raum Personal digital assistant Factory (trading post) Speech synthesis Website Right angle Summierbarkeit Musical ensemble Table (information) Simulation
Meeting/Interview Multiplication sign Videoconferencing User-generated content Right angle Musical ensemble Disk read-and-write head Service-oriented architecture Form (programming)
Filter <Stochastik> Meeting/Interview Telecommunication User-generated content Right angle Bit Musical ensemble Computing platform
Point (geometry) Satellite Filter <Stochastik> Group action Direction (geometry) Laser Distance Event horizon Twitter Facebook Causality Internetworking Different (Kate Ryan album) Videoconferencing Computing platform Decision tree learning Addition Copyright infringement Chemical equation Cellular automaton Fitness function Content (media) Type theory Telecommunication Speech synthesis Right angle Freeware Fundamental theorem of algebra
State of matter Multiplication sign View (database) User-generated content Set (mathematics) Water vapor Open set Perspective (visual) Formal language Web 2.0 Facebook Mathematics Meeting/Interview Different (Kate Ryan album) Videoconferencing Office suite Descriptive statistics Area Bit Hand fan Connected space Data management Filtration Process (computing) Order (biology) MiniDisc Website Self-organization Right angle Quicksort Whiteboard Row (database) Point (geometry) Filter <Stochastik> Game controller Momentum Ultraviolet photoelectron spectroscopy Control flow Online help Mass Element (mathematics) Goodness of fit Internet forum Term (mathematics) Internetworking Business model Authorization Representation (politics) Associative property Computing platform Expression Content (media) Independence (probability theory) Word Integrated development environment Musical ensemble Hydraulic jump Local ring
Point (geometry) Trail Game controller Pay television Sweep line algorithm Direction (geometry) Multiplication sign 1 (number) Water vapor Open set Mereology Perspective (visual) Rule of inference Product (business) Meeting/Interview Internetworking Different (Kate Ryan album) Business model Authorization Computing platform YouTube Fiber (mathematics) Stability theory Theory of relativity Chemical equation Weight Physical law Content (media) Shared memory Division (mathematics) Basis <Mathematik> Type theory Filtration Process (computing) Grand Unified Theory Logic Formal grammar Right angle Object (grammar) Musical ensemble Routing Reading (process) Row (database)
Digital filter Game controller Pay television Regulator gene Shared memory Maxima and minima Event horizon Computer animation Meeting/Interview Different (Kate Ryan album) Authorization Business model Right angle Office suite Endliche Modelltheorie Fiber bundle Musical ensemble Quicksort Table (information) Address space
Web page Point (geometry) Pulse (signal processing) Group action Service (economics) Link (knot theory) State of matter Interior (topology) Direction (geometry) Limit (category theory) Rule of inference Power (physics) Number Internetworking Programmable read-only memory Extension (kinesiology) Computing platform Social class Physical system Form (programming) Area Covering space Predictability Theory of relativity Forcing (mathematics) Physical law Moment (mathematics) Content (media) Total S.A. Lattice (order) Measurement Word Process (computing) Integrated development environment Personal digital assistant Internet service provider Vertex (graph theory) Speech synthesis Right angle Summierbarkeit Procedural programming Spacetime
Web page Digital filter Divisor State of matter Decision theory Weight Plastikkarte Mass Inference Voting Meeting/Interview Term (mathematics) Energy level Service-oriented architecture Form (programming)
Greedy algorithm Digital filter Group action Information Digitizing Gradient Set (mathematics) Flow separation System call Process (computing) Meeting/Interview Different (Kate Ryan album) Business model Authorization Right angle Musical ensemble Office suite Family Computing platform Row (database) Physical system
Digital filter Process (computing) Meeting/Interview State of matter Term (mathematics) Physical law Videoconferencing Quicksort
Ocean current Digital filter Lecture/Conference Semiconductor memory Physical law Harmonic analysis Bit Right angle Disk read-and-write head Metropolitan area network Physical system Exception handling
Digital filter Implementation State of matter Direction (geometry) Multiplication sign Electronic mailing list Menu (computing) Mass Mereology Word Lecture/Conference Term (mathematics) Harmonic analysis Right angle Exception handling
Addition Trail Digital filter Copula (linguistics) State of matter Multiplication sign Set (mathematics) Design by contract Insertion loss Bit Perspective (visual) Element (mathematics) Connected space Right angle Office suite Musical ensemble Booting Physical system Row (database)
Digital filter Regulator gene State of matter Direction (geometry) Multiplication sign Moment (mathematics) Parallel port Bit Line (geometry) Mereology Event horizon Meeting/Interview output
Digital filter Voting Event horizon Computer animation Lecture/Conference Meeting/Interview Term (mathematics) Multiplication sign View (database) Control flow Planning Sequence
Word Voting Meeting/Interview Addressing mode Multiplication sign Moment (mathematics) Order (biology) Representation (politics) Black box
Digital filter Mathematics Voting Event horizon Meeting/Interview Term (mathematics) Black box Pressure
Digital filter Process (computing) Event horizon Lecture/Conference Meeting/Interview Hypermedia Expert system 1 (number)
Meeting/Interview Power (physics)
and and if and and
and to it object the but they're by everyone and welcome to our
session on copyright table talking about a very important reform process that's happening in the EU right now on copyright and it's been over a decade and finally the European Commission has come forward with a proposal to update and modernize copyright law that was passed in an error when we still use VHS in CDs and that predates the smart so there's a really big needs to update copyright law and but copyright laws are often very sort of obscure and I think for most people it's hard to put your finger on why exactly this unimportant wise copyright some form for free expression wise some for creativity for innovation for the open Internet yeah and I think it's also add that the EU is also quite obscure and the EU prophecies in Parliament and the European Commission and the Council the sometimes very close very complex and very hard to navigate so customers here 3 of us here are based in Brussels and Jake make so many trips to Brussels that he basically counts and so today we're going to bring the brussels bubble to you come and before I we start before introduced by panelists and do a short introduction I just wanna do a quick audience for who in his
audience has ever uploaded content on that online anyone have lots of people where streams music or video online now interesting who has ever posted uh fan fiction or comments or anything on any platform a comment the huge who is ever uploading code into giving can have or anything not wonderful OK so lots of hands so all of these issues that I mentioned plus more and are what will be impacted in this copyright reform to copyright impacts all of us has a really big impact on the shape of the web and on the health of the web and so I so today basically we're going to talk about this copyright reform that was it's a copyright directive and what we we're are concerned about is that it is the last condition so the copyright reform proposed by the European Commission doesn't really bringing copyright into the 21st century it is a modernizing and the way that we want but what's worse is that there are some dangerous proposals in there to extend copyright and will be focusing on today is 1 article Article 13 which in will will dive into more but would create a censorship machines and mandate mass as the filtering on platforms in the name of copyright the today were going to learn about what exactly is in Article 13 what does it mean why is it so dangerous for free expression for fundamental rights for creativity and whether or not it is actually good for artists for the creators and finally will talk about what you can do and how you can help stop these censorship machines so we're joined by a fantastic panel of copyright experts we have uh Caroline depart who the coordinator of copyright for creativity
Diego and then home who is a senior policy adviser at European digital rights or edges and we had Jake Beaumont as this who is the imam at the International Music managers form so we're going to start with would you 1 quick round and then I would like to open it up to you guys so you can think about your questions and comments and I would like this to be an interactive discussion so we'll start with and who will tell us a
little bit more in detail about the copyright reform and what article 13 means hi
everyone and so when it's Carolina Kok I'm from C 4 seerc upright for creativity we are launching during Republican also a news information portal called because the PU z z and the antidote come uh which you can hear more about at 1 PM at lightning talk 1 hour from our 1 of our leading journalists Glyn Moody and and we are following closely the big mess called the copyright you in Brussels so logical 13 is not about copyright that's false advertising that the Commission did on us they said we were changing copyright and then they put an article that is basically about censoring the internet and I want you all when you come out of this room to warn remember 1 German expression and that is minus the high on its side that's all that 13 is about it's about policing the Internet and it's not about the police being your normal police the friendly gentleman with a mustache and uniform but it's about big American companies acting as censorship machines under the threat of law and at in cooperation with rights holders an ideal sites scenario for the interest so what's on the table type on its side under it on the table it's on a system whereby if you are platform that accepts a large amount whatever that means of user-uploaded content and content you will have to talk to right holders when they tap on your door to right holders are the and in some cases a small created that did something funky in most cases so many no time on our the big Hollywood studios they're recording labels be publishing at companies such thing as in Germany and those type of people will come to you as a platform say hello you get a lot of user-uploaded content that could be obviously if you're you to a lot of music a lot of videos but that could be get up with a lot of code are that could be at Wikipedia with a lot of knowledge being uploaded on well we think that some of that content could be illegal this is our catalog of copyright-protected works so make sure you filter before it's uploaded and prevent the availability of that content so basically article 13 is about your the capacity in the future to upload something on the internet and not see had blocked randomly because of some private agreement between the platform and a rights holder no police no tribunal nothing in terms of public authorities needs to intervene it's all in under the terms and conditions of the platforms and it's all approved by law as being a great idea that's what article 13 is about of are biggest problem in Brussels is that we're not surprised that the French like that because the French usually like anything that protects copyright but were very surprised that a lot of German politicians like it because we thought that Germany had a tradition of respecting privacy and freedom of speech of its citizens or at least at some politicians have that's our felt obliged to pretend that they had a tradition at yet Article 13 is currently being supported by a lot of of German politicians I hope that it is because they don't understand what it means I'm I've also told friends that if it gets adopted and I think I will go to the factory here in Berlin the place for all start ups are and create a new start up which would be the trawling companies any 1 of you can just send me any material that you consider is copyrighted drawing of your kids some back singing you did on the shower send it to me and I will go to all platforms and notified to them that that is the catalog and they need to filter it obviously it's absurd because there is no filter that exists that can identify all works and you can't identify music sheets you can't identify architecture you can't identify lots of things at the moment and I don't think you want that filter to exist but in all notified and they'll tell me it's impossible are too expensive and I'll settle for a certain sum of which I will share that you know with all the people that send their contents afterwards is that for user 1 last word for the start whats article 13 does is basically recognize existing filters like content idea if you to you has that type of filter on their platform but what it also does it make it makes it impossible for European start-ups to compete with existing platforms because under this system you have to allocate part of your budget when you start to being for such a filter and that means part of your budget is not going to be in for an engineer or a great school there are you know someone that would be an innovator but just to buy for some very very bad censorship software that is like the 2 but blocks more than it should because that's what you do when you are reliable you know in doubt you block so I think that's 13 in the nuchal and you will say more about it but the uses of words yes thank you very much the very clear and concise
explanation I think 1 of the problems we have with Article 39 is that it's very confusing when you read it and so a
lot of and politicians policy makers in the EU are now trying to figure out how to fix it what to do and and they're having a lot of trouble wrapping head around I think what it actually means an and so Caroline explain really clearly that it is making these open platforms liable for content making them the broker agreements may be in the form of licences with major rights holders and implementing potentially very expensive tailored filtering technology time and this impacts um our videos are home videos and user-generated content was sometimes referred to as the G C so that's actually 1 question I didn't ask has anyone here ever remixed music in this in this audience yes anyone
anyone ever made a meme again if anyone ever share new on some of so this is impacting on how these open
platforms work which is far beyond licensed content like and uh licensed music right it is user-generated content that is also copyrighted because we are all right holders and so now I want to go to Diego will I think will will tell us a little bit more about what are the consequences of having something like article 13 and adapted if all platforms hosting large amounts of copyrighted kind that have to implement filters what will that mean online homework but the user using communication and I'm not gonna
about copyright either what the long-term
scary cause temporary monopolies for cooperative uneasily goal in that that be the property rights but because this is something that
I totally different this that that did not trained to joke on the internet and this is done in 2 different ways wise that through voluntary agreements so they use companies to enter into this agreement to maybe at the 3rd hate speech Facebook for example and the other ways that is being done it and the directive we would discoloration by of for platforms and intermediates and a satellite said it is said the problem with this is that uh platforms I'm gone but you know if they are afraid of being sued operated in defiance they tend to overreact and they got the answer to that in the you is that the lasers on allows for an appropriate balance of interests for companies and the dead it allows for them to have incentive to take action against illegal content but on the other hand if I have too much incentive to restrict communication and that can be over it is also a fact that they're they're intermissions Monday at this is a proposal they say well it's not that interesting it's not that in our monitoring obligation which is something we do said and back in the European Union this is not the dinner monitoring obligation because they are looking for a specific events so that when you enter the Union Republic of proximity of about other hand back and they look for every single about at looking for weapons or our article or whatever whatever they look for it so that in I might obligation because they're looking for prospects something specific this is of course absurd and that they're not trend is that whether we have with the what's that privatized false and and we see this in the hate speech elicitation we see this and then by terrorism this addition we see this type on uh prevention so the general trend is like I said to make their the companies that police and the doubts over the Internet so we get different about their bodies in for about our own carts we faced with a little deal with all of our problems I regarding the fundamental rights and liberties as no then at also Somerset in recent event on press freedom uh about the content videos that he said a think just practice for free societies to embrace them um because the thing is that once these disciple here for copyright the purposes of course the current government of the next government's we take come out after the was we have in our countries have what they can use it for whatever they want they can just go out there that that and with everything everything so let's use a censoring his speech I I live within a cell with that often go a quote from from more well known about trying to rephrase it as the Commission was say know and imaginative thought is that they also called a war peace freedom slavery and cannot be strength by the Commission is trying to put in our minds that what they say it's something else so it would be like filters are innovation fit into communicates piracy censorship is discussing about the day of that double speak but you bring up a really good point
about the and sent F. uh um
article would create about making my amp brickmaking platforms liable for copyrighted content which is almost every content they would have an incentive to take down content right so this has a massive impact on expression and creativity and also the ability of platforms to exist rather than having only the biggest platforms that can afford the best filtering technology and have a team of lawyers to be able to manage rights clearance and and take on the legal rest of having open platforms were cover the content can be uploaded so I'm not the dangers there I wanna turn to date because if we're going to censor the web in the name of copyright for rights holders will this be good for artists will this help them so for the International Music managers forum we're a trade association that looks into the business interests the artist's where artists and their representatives and the point that Diego just made about the double speak than the Orwellian contortions of language on this it's quite difficult for me coming from the music industry to sit on a panel that's about the same ship change and stop this because that's 1 description of the description Caroline gave all of article 13 and then the other 1 that we have inside the music industry that's the 1 that generally the artist for exposed to problem music industry in Dmitri so the labels and the publishers is that this is for us this is the Commission trying to help pass of pro-business was disrupted by digital article 13 is a way of supporting creativity and the way that it would support creators is it supports of the people the companies that sustain creative so in other words this is a Ofqual 13 is written on behalf of the record companies in the publishers this if you want help artists you helped record companies some publishers so it's very difficult for us internally in the music industry to look at Article 13 and say what order the unintended consequences What's the logical outcome of this for the author's business without taking a narrow view views that have this work rock music publisher or record company and no we look at it the more we do started to use language like filters and censorship and stuff like that and it's because we don't sit as the artists on 1 side of the fence and the users on the other the artist is connected to the users the artist that fan base is that business is their audience that sustains them and try to find new business models ways to make money that way you giving value in your sharing the music and the emotional connection with your audience is what we're all about we don't need to do that necessarily in an old way as prescribed as set out by the old industry that was disrupted by digital we can potentially come up with new ways to do it the biggest hurdle we have developing new business models is investment is very expensive what to devote the time to creating music full time to go out the road to uh spend time studio most of will have to work full time job and then do this as a hobby while they develop so you end up with the artist being grouped in with the so-called user-generated content so stuff the fans are uploading hobbyists people who don't consider themselves as artists is being uploaded site platforms like SoundCloud or you tube in the same way that start up artists uploading elements when he made his 1st recordings he went into a local studio in Nashville to make a disk for his mom's birthday he had no intention of becoming a global superstar he was creating what we would now describe as user-generated content now he probably panic from Facebook initiate video with his mom and so that area of where the artist through their R&D where they develop their audience where they build we we have a foot in that area of the artists which is the bit that's being controlled lockdown restricted by article 13 that's where we're developing so if we get that every restricted we of forced into areas controlled by additional stakeholders which broadly in the music industry is universal sunny Warner's and regardless of their ownership across won't across Japan they're wrong from America so you get a very American centric sets of may be at most 10 maybe taken some of the bigger independent companies 3 sets of rights holders to become very powerful but the point where you have an obligation all platforms to filter to check content to make sure the rights holders a happy the risk to any platforms Carol unexplained of uploading stuff that they're not happy with becomes too great it becomes too expensive to create an environment like a u-tube or sound fiber-optics could develop and flourish and build independently their own business and you force all of the music or the content into narrow platforms but then lean very heavily on licenses from the big players so you end up with this slightly sort of modern culture In the same way as with single a high streets ability would look the same as the High Street in London or Brussels with the same stored you start to get them on a platform like Spotify would have a global playlist which is dominated by the artist pushed by freebee companies out your not stand so we really them worry about plurality and diversity the ability for European art is particularly to get onto the Internet to reach audiences and develop their own business model the thing that we're after Office the representatives is funding if you force us into an ecosystem that's controlled by free big companies that can take their pick of what successful and the based in in the states it's really unlikely that their control over the marketplace and therefore the ability to fund artist because you wouldn't invest in an you didn't have access to the markets so only those companies that control the market will invest really puts restrictions on us developing new business models so from the starting point of hearing article 13 is for us for artists then hearing from all partners who we do like working with the of great things that record companies music publishers collective management organizations but hearing from them that we really need to support this thing it becomes very difficult to insist on the other side of the discussion and the site of but the longer we had to discuss these proposals came out in September last year the bigger the momentum and the consensus is amongst all community that we really have to oppose this and it becomes difficult to stand up and say we don't think that is in our interest when Hall of the the European Parliament and all of the music industry is telling us this is for you you must get behind it so we're we're breaking ranks having had a long discussion and saying we actually think this is really dangerous in terms of uh um the artist so it from the user's perspective it's not good for the fans music fans and all of all forms of of uh culture and content and from the perspective it's not a good thing we then have to really worry about what the momentum and the incentive is behind the JQ raise so many an important points that we come across an hour and advocacy for copyright of any of you have have come across it as well is that there is a difference and where there is a more nuanced view of water rights holder is what artists and creators are and if you look at only half of the story that yes you might hurt start ups with Article 13 yes and there might be some censorship OK there might not be a lot of user-generated content on these platforms but the creative an industry the creators in Europe will thrive and when you talk to date and I'm a math and talk to individual independent artists and music managers to see that actually for artists that's the reality of platforms and open platforms is sometimes what they really need in order to build those relationships with their with their fans and so it's not actually for the artists and so bad I would like to open it now I think 4 questions to the audience if you guys have any questions or comments we'd love to have uh involve you in this discussion so the the or people are not caffeinated enough the and Caroline once as the question after they have won the good morning i'm KonradConrad kind and I am not a specialist in Europe but it was interested because it seems Europe is sort of a debate going on board protecting rights
and opening right so that's what I thought was interesting in that I got the impression that you did a very good at what is but somehow all I feel are not satisfied that I heard loud enough then cool world and would thus actually benefit from copyright or we have been lost is you have it right now as an i don't warrant and it's my gut feeling is that cannot be at the answer so I think it would be very helpful if you of moreover clearly showing both sides and we're a part of through and not just the devil thank OK maybe I can do a quick disclaimer and is maybe not so clear when we might we might not be in favor on this panel of Article 13 of these filters and but it doesn't necessarily mean that we are against copyright what we're looking for is a balance
between the protection of copyright and the public interest and the biggest problem with article 13 and then I'll leave it to you because if you want to take bigger from other article 13 that its way out of balance that it's like killing mosquito with a machine gun I'm and so we we use a bar brand over we certainly support finding ways that for artists to get fearing innovation and figuring out how they can be paid better and treated better and protect we consider ourselves right holders to we have exclusive rights as well but we also think that a lot of these problems can be solved by having more openness having more open platforms different business models seeing what can emerge from the from the market so we're not advocating to abolish copyright and I'm really glad you bring that up because I think a lot of members of the European Parliament and in the you feel that that might be there they would get painted into that corner as they say I don't really supporter of 13 and I'll say are your against copyright Europeans rights you're against the the creativity in your time and so I think it's I just wanted to make that disclaimer that on dealers take that you have something to respond I I think Article 13 of the inception of Article 13 and the big mistake at the start when we start looking at it is that it was clearly aimed at 1 single company when the discussion started and that was used to so we started by calling it you'd you'd logical I'm and it was clearly stated by various rights like if B who represents the music in this part of the music industry that's there you can be used against you tube is that there's a lot of music on there and they're not getting the same amount of money out of you to and the sharing you know feels they have their as they would otherwise qualify so basically it's like in the old days when people were complaining about read you helping people to listen to music and then they would you see the fiber these I know I don't have an issue with them being annoyed at YouTube and picking a fight with them and all of that the problem is is that that complained to the Commission resulted in Article 13 being drafted as an open ended provision that applies to any content so not just music or audiovisual content that anything be protected work and to any platform with no relation between what's on that platform and the content that it could be complaining about so it's kind of I'm going to get it up and asking them to impose a censorship filter for audio-visual even though I know there's no division 1 get a type of so it's found the principle of companies being annoyed at each other because they're not getting a fair deals and then being sold through legislation that then has a lot of collateral damage that's what's wrong with 13 I'm I think if you aren't Sunni or in my are not getting a fair deal out of you tube and I'm willing to believe them when they say that they should you to their antitrust you know authority and stable they're being abusive maybe the problem is with the music industry that's than and just minor get how they treat their creators and discover they have the same practices then you to pass with this recording industry I don't know but I think that is the basic law of article 13 and of a lot of the Copyright Directive is 1 of the legislature thinks of a specific problems you know between 2 companies or with 1 technology and then tries to write an article that is general it always fails because the guys you're aiming at their big enough to survive and you do their thing but it's all the small ones that get caught in the net that usually are the ones that have the misery afterward I don't know that helped you at all to see who were the other stakeholders in this and get just jump on that as well we we come at it from the altered perspective so we support copyright and we want to get high so we support licensing so we're in favor of anything in the ensures is more valuable money coming back to copyright through licensing direct licensing or collective licensing facts what so difficult for us to come into this and then think water that's the wrong route the technology that exists that all the bicycle is not good enough to allow the broad sweep of artist you want inside the formal so-called music industry the independent alters the increasingly flourishing so it would start to create a really narrow definition tight definition of the music industry that's it's control within a few historically powerful players all things like the Internet Napster Steve Jobs ports of go back a long time the screening thing the new business model is 10 years old Spotify you to the 10 years old and it's really the last point here is that consumers and artists of really embrace them and understood that he sees the future this is where we're at the start of the new industry that's emerging from the old 1 a lot of the complaining from my industry about the effect of digital is that we look at our old business model we that we used to sell CDs in which you would place a me 10 euros for the right to listen for evidence that album that 10 tracks the new business model is you might pay a micropayment throughout funding of subscription me use long like never get back 10 euros of you but I like it more in the long run like copyright so we're really starting to just bring micropayments the rent of music versus some logic payments for ownership and we're basing a lot of all complaints or we use to make this much now we make that much and it's completely logical without foundation so that's a really bad basis for making fall reaching copyright rules just as we're it's it's about 10 years but really it's like point using the new business model what we need to do is to see new platforms of provide solutions for objects we get really excited when we look across a television where increasing disintermediation is occurring the production houses are being forced out of platforms like Amazon and HBO going straight to the creators and investing in them and saying
give us content so if there's less money on the table disintermediation removes the regulators and publishers is a great way to get more money to the office of the price of screaming we think currently the price model is too high sporophyte comes in around about 10 euros globally 10 dollar
stateside as Amazon and Apple stock to compete for audience share in that they will be able to take a similar Camisón will bundle music subscription in with other authors with withdrawing with deliveries with things like that so sporophytes going to have to stop the tropics per month price
to increase its audience so we can't sit there and say streaming great it's growing we think it's overpriced and to grow the user base made the total collections but the price have to come down this these really difficult questions for us to tackle so coming up with a article 13 that just gives control act to some of the rights holders is 1 thing but none of the 3 in addresses the problems of how we grow revenues how we address the different business model and that sort of it and it's very hard to come up with a positive solutions to address those engaging in question to questions
of very tricky and the first one is lessons we have the brussels bubble representing the wrong or how the politics of this playoff obviously the Copyright Directive was proposed by you know kind of a single area has since moved to other things uh is the Commission as enthusiastically behind it as it was when it proposed and from from your understanding of and secondly what are you planning protests are you planning a kind of blackouts etc cetera what we expect to see we think of the act there was also here and write this 1 and thank you and my question is do you have any kind of an idea how to solve this problem I mean that it's not only the EU but also members states like Germany trying to push liability to words intermediaries and and other service providers and satiny pushing a liability but require them to act as if they were great of the judiciary so it's that is something really strange going and which seems to me as serving some kind of a USB of thinking that 1st Amendment only but only in the relies on governmental kind of relation and there is this space may so we don't deal with it uh but but somehow it just seems to me that we're all or most of us are really critical in this kind of solution EU comes up and those the US comes up but I just don't know whether you have anything in mind how to solve a total reconsidering e-commerce directive maybe reaches already 17 years old so that there are these legal measurements reach our reaches designed for a totally different environments and my question is whether you have anything in mind has to go forwards and push forward and you and call you also had your hand OK so maybe they can have each of you because of this 3 class yes we have and there the forces behind it as well the we
would even be a from a commission before the proposal salt and even the most hardcore uh copyright fundamentalist today in the Commission did not agree with most of the thing that we're being discussed but also assume that the halting was the main force behind it even there are both uh Picabia at fundamentally said in the Commission and the would you know see which of the real forces I have not anecdotal of 1 of our meetings I have with their sum them and representational 1 big Member State in Brussels how pulse explained that all the sea issues so about the article 15 and also answered our copyright and say yes all of these are really yes soccer yes to the prom interior but you know publishers sparse so influential at this is someone working for a democratic country telling me that well we are not power you so the people of that country are not empowered its some forces some small what some a small number of the companies who are deciding the policies which I find quite boring regarding brought this well that is not there uh go on the street at proteases style but out of members could be but are we are we think that this is probably leading to some actor s in a moment well when when this is gonna happen all Disney and or we will not stop at every down a commerce states in their side is all their lives it's a somebody has been a able to allow a lot of and a and in the Internet role their so far you there's a need to discuss it we can discuss everything but I don't think getting their predictions other the safe harbor mistake is going to fix this problem some there's a couple of tools online you can already used to reach out to the European Parliament uh there say the mean uh that is as a tool to call your or Europe MEP vertical NAP and there's saves the link that is a campaign that initially focused only on ancillary copyright press publishes right but is now also expanding to Article 13 because as we are all discovering that's actually the biggest ball in the Copyright Directive much more than the press publishes right to to a certain extent but on solutions how I think over 20 that they think it's 24 members of the European Parliament sent a letter of today or yesterday to the European Commission asking for clarification on notice an action by private companies so basically the system that the e-commerce directive has implemented is 1 whereby if you see illegal content of any form because of copyright or hate speech or whatever you know to notify the platform once the platform is notified it needs to take action and the action could be to remove the content or to contact the person that uploaded to ask you have a legitimate right to put this I mean the problem is that notice an action is referred to in the covers directed but it doesn't say what should happen so it's pretty much up to every platform to invent their procedure and a lot of cases it's not easy for users to understand what happens at the content gets removed it looks like a painful process to you I'm contradicts the claim and you just think OK my contents removed so I think just to go back to a point about how do we try to avoid all of these platforms getting a blank check to do whatever with our content on clarifying the notice an action procedures and making sure the rule of law applies to them seems like a good way out to start this and that hooks on to the e-commerce directive but doesn't open it because believe me it's 17 years old but it's a really well written document it's 5 pages long
Brussels has not produced legislation that is 5 pages long for ages what we produce now is 50 pages long and it's as white black and gray in the same document and then we give it to a judge and say could not and we're amazed that the legislation at the the court's decisions that come out of it are all over the place at national level it it's very confusing what we do not because there's so many in those days there was a lobbying in
Brussels are not as much as so legislation was still reasonably good and I think this is where I am and actually going back to your question about campaigns and how I would like to ask the people and don't have to answer from the room you can come to me afterward what would work what can we do to make people act against that because and in the days of factor we had 10 thousand people in the streets of Warsaw by minus 10 protecting protection uh protesting against ACTA the problem is in these days with what Poland is experiencing in terms of its government I think they have other reasons to go in the streets and copyrights so it's gonna be difficult but also in the old days things I'm going back to your question about you know putting as is gone do we throw a party in terms of the Commission changing their mind know because it's in the hands of the Council and the Parliament now and the Commission is just intervening as a harmless broker with some form of inference that kind not that much I so we we're dealing with the Council so Member States these people get only influenced in capital still don't get influenced in Brussels and then we're dealing with members of the European Parliament that also normally only read listen to their constituents so people in their Member States yet we haven't found the magic solution to make people in the Member States mass of the people do it but massively say no I will not accept you to give away my freedoms my fundamental freedoms away to private companies and to give them your blessing when the senses uh censoring me we haven't found the weights which have ideas I you know call give you my card at the end feel free to send them to me because we we're we're yet we we don't know how to trigger
dismay uh this may we feel we haven't found a way to share it to the to given John Smith the street because as soon as the year copyright everyone was blank and some my got complicated so we have a problem in Brussels in that the other stakeholders within the music industry the intermediaries of very powerfully established they have large offices with launched all we have no 1 that I am the there is no explaining to the politicians that the industry does in this respect for the
artist is a slow process but hidden within other articles so we've been discussing 13 in 14 15 and 16 hour acknowledgements that record companies and publishers haven't treated all tastes fairly over money we don't think that the value all the adjustments this small adjustments into how authors can check what they've been paid all the rights that they get paid that we don't think the 14 15 16 in themselves transformed the author's business model but there'd acknowledgment that the policy makers and treat the rights holders the in Dmitri rights holders and the call right solves the artist the separate interest groups trying to find a positive way forward we would like to scale up the impact of 14 15 16 there was a proposal from publisher maybe Rosa tongue look would give Altes access to usage data would that would help them to understand their audiences so digital platforms grade a lot of information about the usage and consumption of music that information gets lost the record labels and publishers doesn't make its way back to the artist only the Otis greedy that reject because only the artist is operating across recordings publishing Bryant's lawyers and having a direct social engagement with their families so we would like to get it in the mind of the policy makers that the artists have a very clear different set of rights by all scanned from all value that already in the system this doesn't impinge on the uh consumers rights they're already given this information across the platforms like each you support of what we would like that information to reach all the way back to the office and that it's not we think is evidence that the uh the proposals on necessarily based on all test thank you and want
1st plus 1 Caroline's uh open request that we would love to hear from you but particularly the German audience because the Germans have a lot of influence on the spot on particular and in Brussels and if we can move something in the Member States then it actually trickles up and to to Brussels
so anything in terms of how to make uh how to get back to movement had to make copyright and the EU process I think more tangible and many of us have the campaigns and 4 C been releasing all sorts of little short videos which are very helpful and and Mozilla just launched yesterday and a paper storm campaign where you can drop of papers on your your represented in the parliament and and in Member States were were all looking for ways and to to connect users that that wants better copyright laws to the European process but have it's it's a it's an uphill battle I think so what does anyone who would anyone like to respond to that to that question are
there any other questions or should I and became very so and we talked a little bit about the solutions in when and what you know what kind of campaigns were doing but is there may be moving a little bit outside of Article 13 of going out and it to what
what it would be ideal copyright lobbying like watch what would be the answer to that article 13 do you think the secrets of think this can have a head man well I we have written extensively about our original copyright and related to the topic of which is modernized to the 21st century would like to see harmonized exceptions annotation so we all share the same rights because the union we see it would like to see a way to remedy problems which doesn't go necessarily to there's the system we have announced to the current status quo and so and generally will at to see a copyright which is not based on enforcement is that the people don't respect cover right maybe it is because it's not working well because it's not adapted to their current users so instead of trying tools must people was most companies now with that with current handover could break the law they would still find a system which is respected by everyone and that also gives a memories for all of course and then we will get less of a hominid and real modern in distributed manner to the outermost ch
on that the the current system so that the 2001 InfoSoc Directive as it's called is based on on 1 harmonized exclusive right which is copyright they got that part right in terms
of harmonization and then a list of depending on how you read them more common them with the sub bullets 22 22 exceptions that are voluntary on Member States are under the Chinese menu principle I saw a legal wording but basically is you can't pick and choose from any of those exceptions are parts of exceptions as a member state in Europe of legislation which seems and I think it's an Icelandic professeur that computed that gives more than 2 million possibilities in terms of implementation and that is what we are facing at a time where people are uploading content online in 1 country and it can be seen in the entire world I how should copyright and the improved will obviously by taking away that mass and that patchwork where if you ask any individual user do you think you're doing anything illegal under copyright they will at best
answer I don't know or at worst answer I don't care of both elements are bad for copyright and for creators because we should care about copyright if copyright to be what it should be which is the reward for creativity but because copyright has stopped being a reward for creativity and creators and has started being a way of cashing in for
certain industries we stopped caring and to me any copyright review that is that it would be 1 where we started caring again and started feeling that connection with creators again and thinking yeah I'm fine with this who who is you know that guy's thing he's music and I think you should get a book and that's that's the bits that got hold some time ago and and that's the that that this review is absolutely not addressing that guns described it being the copyright system being very confusing from the user and the which permissions you have to secure or you should find exactly the same from the office perspective most artists do not understand how if they wrote a song and I performed it where they rotate dependent on what usages occurring different bodies will be in charge of issuing a license so when the society pipe that they've got contract track and the bodies that might've issued the license for those specific use is that varies from country 28 Member States but then globally so from our and it's really confusing than on the performance side with a record label that's an additional set of right so we think it needs were forming a and really stripping down and becoming much simpler to use and that would then increase the money stays in the system and prevent the loss to legal bills risks and would encourage more this but the coming so we would like to really we fresh a reboot resettlement copula thanks and any questions so back OK
and we talked a little bit about its well so the solution the broad strokes of the fact that there is a regulation or a directive happening right now and it's very important to mobilize in Member States but I'm creates Caroline could you give us a little more of the
understanding of the status of this proposal on what is the time line look like what would be the best time to act OK that's a difficult 1 and you know because there's moving parts so at the moment the on the directive is being discussed in parallel in the European Parliament on the 1 hand and in the Council on the other hand and so the way it's being discussed in the European Parliament is that some they work in committees that have certain specialties and copyright falls under 1 lead comity of which is the legal 1 the legal committee and then a lot of other committees need to give opinions so they don't have the same status as the lead committee but they still have an input to give an in that puzzle of out lots of committees suggesting lots of amendments to the text proposed by the Commission we are at the stage where pretty much on all the committees have had 8 starting opinion from a
rapporteur so from someone saying I think we should change it this way and that will have the opportunity to suggest the members of the Committee to suggest their amendments on top of that saying well you know I think it should be changed as we
it's a transitory I this will then lead to vote in those committees and usually there is a sequence where 1st the nonleading committees vote and then it ends up with the last vote of the Committee's being the
1 of the leading comity that kind of brings together all of the views of the other guys and tries to find something that looks like a compromise the initial plan in terms of timing was for all of that in kitchen and magic cooking to happen before what we call summer break which is pretty much Mij July I'm as always in Brussels there are delays because things are more complicated than things and now it seems more and more likely that all of this might be pushed until after summer break somewhere in September In the old days of Brussels like a couple of years ago what then happened is that after that each comity vote the text would then be sent to the European Parliament
Plenary so instead of having it dealt with by fortyish any are 60 any in a committee it would go to the full 750 any peas and that was usually that moment between comity vote and plenary vote was when campaign started where we would say right your any peak is there's like a 700 guys that didn't follow this thing and you should tell them it's bad or good or whatever on those were the good old days In the new Brussels and they've invented a black box that they put in between because everything takes too much time to adopt and you do not want legislators to think too much about legislation when they right that's very bad seems they try to rush things I through and the
way they try to rush things to is by saying you know what after that comity vote In order to make sure we have a good understanding between the Council and the Parliament we are not going to go from the con motivo to the plenary vote directly we are going to put something in the middle that has an English name which is not an English word and which is called a trial so we are going to put in any private room with no oversight by anything Democratic representatives of the Council representatives of the European Parliament and I'm talking handful of people I'm not talking all of them and representatives of the Commission and between the 3 of them by making sure they talk for a very long time until 2 o'clock in the morning and do
not get access to the food until they have the deal and the booze they will strike a deal an informal deal and then once we have that deal we will bring it to the plenary vote and we will tell the 750 guys in the room and you guys are here to rubber-stamp this deal because there's a lot of sweat blood and tears that went into it and the private room in the back and we kind of it's done bone changes I that also means that in terms of campaigning for us we need to go to you and say
that comity vote it's really exciting 42 has in Brussels are going to vote about something you need to put a lot of pressure on them and more importantly you need to stop them from putting the thing in the black box you need to ask them to send it to plenary and he looked at in a democratic way by 750 guys not just by a handful of people in the room get back all EU
legislative experts and you understand how complicated is that has had a huge so we know that from
now until fall will be really important to reach out to your representative and make sure that the ones that text gets into that secret shadowy process of the trialogue than both sides actually have a decent text and to work with I think we're at time down OK so I want to thank uh the panelists for being great
and showing up and I also want to thank so I want to I want to thank uh media as well who organizes cannot together with the Mozilla so thank you all very much and enjoy the rest of the Republic at the the heart
of the power of Christ and you