Post 9hADbqSPkMoaJFxtQW by cryptkiddie@chaos.social
(DIR) More posts by cryptkiddie@chaos.social
(DIR) Post #9hACGHOinoOxXTOHrs by jz@mamot.fr
2019-03-26T12:56:45Z
0 likes, 2 repeats
#Article13: EU Parliament denied itself, by a *3 votes* majority, the right to vote for or against #Article13. A parliament that votes against voting about the most controversial/crucial point! Don't come and complain when people abstain to #EU elections. Well played, industry!#CopyWrong #Lobby
(DIR) Post #9hADDG4zLaXgXHHfKS by tuxicoman@social.jesuislibre.net
2019-03-26T13:07:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jz is there an alternative proposed by people against #article13 that would not touch freedom of speech but bring money to creators?
(DIR) Post #9hADbqSPkMoaJFxtQW by cryptkiddie@chaos.social
2019-03-26T13:12:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tuxicoman @jz It's pretty easy: Just leave it as-is (platforms have to remove what is reported to them) or give them a chance to get the money made with illegal uploads on a comercial platform...
(DIR) Post #9hAEGSAOxmYeqYu3w8 by tuxicoman@social.jesuislibre.net
2019-03-26T13:19:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@cryptkiddie @jz it's not so easy. Right now the burden to search, report, attack for counterfeiting is on the creator side.It would not be a problem if no big business was made on this.If you look at Youtube and other platforms, you can see they have a business model based on the exploitation of other people content they don't pay for. This creates an even bigger disappointment because customers are mostly on those platform.
(DIR) Post #9hAEILdsC0eTBqakcK by jz@mamot.fr
2019-03-26T13:16:54Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
All of which while the stream of the plenary was down! If @Europarl_EN@twitter.com wanted to cut itself from its constituency, both symbolically and politically, it wouldn't do otherwise! Bravo, fuckers!
(DIR) Post #9hAG1oBZ122qhXaj32 by cryptkiddie@chaos.social
2019-03-26T13:39:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tuxicoman @jz But at least in germany, everyone is in charge of claming his rights, if you don't report a crime, nothing will happen, i find it a bit strange to change that only for this point
(DIR) Post #9hAGIL60QJdVP7sGBs by cryptkiddie@chaos.social
2019-03-26T13:40:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tuxicoman @jz AND who has to find out, if a platform didn't filter properly after the passing of the new law? The same creators, i guess...
(DIR) Post #9hAGILIPgBYq1bgAWu by tuxicoman@social.jesuislibre.net
2019-03-26T13:42:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@cryptkiddie @jz I don't support #article13 I wonder if someone has a better solution than this and the current situation that only make GAFAM bigger to propose.
(DIR) Post #9hAGUO4PBvD66Ts1uC by cryptkiddie@chaos.social
2019-03-26T13:44:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tuxicoman @jz My point is just, that #article13 isn't even an enhancement for creators so it is not necessary to have a better idea, because the current state is not ideal, but in fact better than what is they just agreed on...
(DIR) Post #9hAHf2w0DGHTgzaQl6 by tuxicoman@social.jesuislibre.net
2019-03-26T13:57:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@cryptkiddie @jz there is still a hope. That people want to share content no matter what and that will push them out of GAFAM where the filter is too strict.