Bad news about #Article13, the copyright directive (which includes Art 13) has passed the council of ministers.
Interesting footnote: if the UK gov had simply abstained (or voted against), the directive would not have passed. Britain represents enough population to form a blocking minority.
However, the British government voted in favour.
The law can still be stopped in the European courts (which is what happened to the data retention directive), but this is much messier and more difficult.
Why do we consider article 13 (that's actually article 17 in the newest version of the directive) so evil again?
A lot of misinformation surrounds this topic, and I feel like people generelly have a misconception about what it's actually all about.
Furthermore, we can't really predict how well an automatic filter would work in 3 years, especially with AI and machine learning on the rise. Of course, if we look at YouTube, who already applies a (terrible) filter, then things don't look too bright.
As it stands now, I can only say for certain, that it protects individual artists, and jabs at American mega companies, creating a huge opening for FOSS platforms such as the Fediverse
If we can't predict how filters will work, then we should not pass laws that depend on them.
One of many problems with Art 13 is it requires zero piracy but also zero censorship of fair use.
No filter will ever be able to deliver on this, and inevitably one part of the law will not be enforced properly.
I'm betting fair use will be dropped because the fair use lobby is less powerful than the publishing lobby.
Fosstodon is a Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.