Original Question(s)
Have you encountered, or are you aware of problems faced by consumers or suppliers when dealing with online platforms?
Tips for question 1
-
Processes that take infringing content offline (such as filters and notice systems) which take down infringing content consistently overreach and often result in the blocking of legal content.
-
Monitoring billions of posts per day for infringement relies on automated systems, which often unfairly censor legal speech and expression.
-
Geoblocking, where content is available in some countries and not others can be confusing and restricts access to knowledge and information.
-
When individuals are responsible for monitoring content, they apply their unique quirks and morality, often inconsistently.
Original Question(s)
Are you a holder of rights in digital content protected by copyright which is used in an online platform?
As a holder of rights in digital content protected by copyright have you faced any of the following circumstances?
- An online platform such as a video sharing website or an online content aggregator uses my protected works online without having asked for my authorization?
- An online platform such as a video sharing website or an online content aggregator refuses to enter into or negotiate licensing agreement with me
- An online platform such as a video sharing website or an online content aggregator is willing to enter into a licensing agreement on terms that I consider unfair
- An online platform uses my protected works but claims it is a hosting provider under Article 14 of the E-Commerce directive in order to refuse to negotiate a license or to do so under their own terms
- If yes, explain.
Tips for question 2
-
Despite what some rights-holders say, hyperlinks themselves should not be copyrighted. Copyright rules are already broken and should not be applied to everyday linking on Twitter and Facebook.
-
Right now rights-holders can request videos are removed from YouTube where copyrighted music happens to be playing in the background, such as the ‘dancing baby case’.
-
Different countries in the EU have different rules on what use of copyright material is permitted, making it difficult for Internet users to know if what they are doing is legal.
-
Uses of parody and humour, such as funny gifs, should be acceptable uses of copyrighted content, but are often removed automatically without any way to appeal the removal of content.
Original Question(s)
Mere conduit/caching/hosting describe the activities that are undertaken by a service provider. However, new business models and services have appeared since the adopting of the E-commerce Directive. For instance, some cloud service providers might also be covered under hosting services e.g. pure data storage. Other cloud-based services, as processing, might fall under a different category or not fit correctly into any of the existing ones. The same can apply to linking services and search engines, where there has been some diverging case-law at national level. Do you think that further categories of intermediary services should be established, besides mere conduit/caching/hosting and/or should the existing categories be clarified?
Tips for question 3
-
The EU Commission has proposed an idea that would require platforms to censor the web by monitoring and removing content posted by Internet users. I do not support this so-called ‘duty of care’ provision in the Digital Single Market plan
-
Monitoring billions of posts per day results in automated systems that unfairly censor legal speech and expression.
-
When websites make decisions on what is legal content they are acting like courts and judges, a role they are not qualified for, and are very to get the balance wrong.
-
When individuals monitor content they apply their own unique quirks and morality, often inconsistently. For example Facebook permits hate speech, but bans nudity.
Original Question(s)
Are you a holder of rights in digital content protected by copyright which is used in an online platform?
As a holder of rights in digital content protected by copyright have you faced any of the following circumstances?
- An online platform such as a video sharing website or an online content aggregator uses my protected works online without having asked for my authorization?
- An online platform such as a video sharing website or an online content aggregator refuses to enter into or negotiate licensing agreement with me
- An online platform such as a video sharing website or an online content aggregator is willing to enter into a licensing agreement on terms that I consider unfair
- An online platform uses my protected works but claims it is a hosting provider under Article 14 of the E-Commerce directive in order to refuse to negotiate a license or to do so under their own terms
- If yes, explain.
Tips for question 4
-
Laws that create link taxes for online platforms harm our ability to innovate online and actually give entrenched publishers more power over online content.
-
Regardless of where you live, many of our favourite websites will be impacted by bad regulations; the Web is global and it will affect Internet users everywhere.
-
Many websites cannot afford to pay money to link to excerpts of content available elsewhere online. New fees on linking limit what they link to, or could force them to shut down entirely.
-
Taxing links stifles innovation for new online services. The next reddit or Twitter would be unable to start up under these rules.
-
The web is an incredible information space, and every successful scheme to prevent linking weakens the foundation of the open Internet.
Original Question(s)
Do you consider that different categories of illegal content require different policy approaches as regards notice-and-action procedures, and in particular different requirements as regards the content of the notice?
Should the content providers be given the opportunity to give their views to the hosting service provider on the alleged illegality of the content?
Tips for question 5
-
Legislators have a key role in making our digital sphere a safe space where individuals can be free from abuse and harassment.
-
Our laws have been crafted with the delicate balance between free expression and legal speech in mind. These laws should be used to curb abusive behaviour online, rather than creating a new system.
-
When copyrighted material is shared the harm is usually an economic and business one. However, extreme and abusive messages have a lifelong emotional and mental impact, on individuals and society.
- These two issues do not fit under the same framework.
