EU wants to require permission to make a link on the Web


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Somebody toss a copy of “As We May Think” on this guy’s desk – in paper form, to make sure he reads it. Maybe if the 1945 conception of linking is described to him he’ll get it.

If a legal document used to prosecute a copyright infringer mentions the URL of said infringement, will it infringe as well and send the whole proceedings into am infinite loop?


#3

[quote=“gadgetgirl02, post:2, topic:68898, full:true”]If a legal document used to prosecute a copyright infringer mentions the URL of said infringement, will it infringe as well and send the whole proceedings into am infinite loop?
[/quote]That would be hilarious, but unfortunately it’d completely fail. It’d be the plaintiff’s legal documents that list that URL, and as the plaintiff is the owner of said URL…


#4

Öttinger is a fool. That’s why his own party made him go to Brussels. They probably got tired to deal with his onset senile dementia.


#5

Yeah, but if you list the the URL of the site that did the infringing…


#6

making a link to a Web-page that contains infringing material would expose you to liability for copyright infringement yourself.

There’s legal precedent for this - it’s it how they shut down Napster, and then lots of other P2P technology? The result is not what Cory thinks. BoingBoing would hire no lawyers to scrub the site. Instead, what would happen is thousands of people would be blindsided by lawsuits they had no way of avoiding, and no defense against. The net effect would be a powerful disincentive for any creators to put work on the web - except the wealthy and powerful.

And so the web becomes broadcast TV. And come to think of it, weren’t there once thousands of independent broadcasters?


#7

I applaud the EU’s role(exactly how the credit should be divided between it, the UN, and ‘lots and lots of nukes’ is a question I leave to the historians) in keeping the Europeans from fighting a nigh-unimaginably brutal and staggeringly bloody war of profoundly pointless attrition, least on their own soil, for a more or less unprecedented length of time; but has seeing ‘EU’ and ‘Internet’, ‘EU’ and ‘Web’, or ‘EU’ and ‘Copyright’ in the same paragraph ever been anything but terrible news?


#8

Unfortunately, we all get the government the most stupid and apathetic half of us deserves. If it weren’t that way, one suggestion that stupid would preclude him ever holding public office again. Somehow, people in all of the educated western democracies keep voting for jackasses like this.


#9

He certainly is a fool; but isn’t his ‘idea’ here not so dissimilar from a Brussels-appropriate expanded-and-‘harmonized’ proposal for basically the same terrible plan that both Spain and Germany tried domestically to keep the Google menace away from their publishers?

Given how well those implementations went, it takes a solid grade of idiot to suggest doubling down and dragging as much of Europe as possible along for the ride; but it’s not as though this plan mutated to life in the cryptic bureaucracy dishes and is now threatening innocent national governments.


#10

I would exchange “EU” with “politicians/politics” in general. The (catastrophic) directions other governments make regarding copyright/web are quite similar (DMCA?! TTIP!).

Reason for this? Don’t know but one reason is probably that most politicians are old farts living isolated from those same technologies they try to regulate.


#11

[quote=“Boundegar, post:6, topic:68898, full:true”]And so the web becomes broadcast TV. And come to think of it, weren’t there once thousands of independent broadcasters?
[/quote]TV Broadcasters never were given the power to sue TV Guide for mentioning they exist.


#12

I believe the Napster case hinged on whether it served any substantial non-infringing purpose, or was it mainly a tool for facilitating piracy. (Thus some P2P apps these days make a point of touting their utility for self-publishing and distribution without the publisher having to shoulder all the bandwidth costs. Vuze, bloated as it is, has a whole lineup of free content channels.) Arguing that hrefs are primarily infringement tools, though, is plainly a non-starter.


#13

It’s not illegal to report a crime, is it?

“Hey guys! I just noticed that over at www.watchsomenewmovies.net they’re illegally hosting new releases.” Be sure not to go to www.watchsomenewmovies.net because you’d be supporting illegal activity. I hope those guys get arrested.


#14

If anybody actually cares about what such a peanut gallery think, maybe. Let them piss into the wind.


#15

This has some really awesome potential to generate money for content creators. Just imagine how much they can get out of anyone who prints an ISBN or a research paper bibliography.


#16

Are there terribly compelling reasons why all journalism couldn’t/shouldn’t be not-for-profit?


#17

Are map publishers to be held liable for giving directions to locations that might be/have been used for committing crime?

If not, they’d better get on it!


#18

I’m worried about my liking of your infringing post…


#19

Oh no!

Is my worry a thought-crime?


#20

“Excuse me, do you know where the nearest starbucks is?”