It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The European Commission Is Preparing To Make Linking To Other Websites ‘Illegal’

page: 1
13

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 02:38 AM
link   
The European Commission Is Preparing To Make Linking To Other Websites ‘Illegal’


The European Commission is preparing a frontal attack on the hyperlink, the basic building block of the Internet as we know it. This is based on an absurd idea that just won’t die: Making search engines and news portals pay media companies for promoting their freely accessible articles.



According to a draft communication on copyright reform leaked yesterday (via IPKat), the Commission is considering putting the simple act of linking to content under copyright protection. This idea flies in the face of both existing interpretation and spirit of the law as well as common sense. Each weblink would become a legal landmine and would allow press publishers to hold every single actor on the Internet liable.



These talks are happening again despite failed attempts beforehand,

Earlier attempts at establishing this principle resulted in Germany’s and Spain’s ancillary copyright laws for press publishers. These attempts backfired – with tremendous collateral damage. Cont...
Source


While I'm not a European member can see this concerning for more than just the EU, as a starting point, in the long run. Especially since similar has been talked of in the media in other upcoming areas of concern with law and the internet, link shared and content sharing sites need to heed these warnings.

The source goes on to say the text is not a law proposed but rather a summary of the Commission's plans for 2016. Watch for the plan that is slated to go public on Dec. 9th.


Main Source

Source 2


Title as is to combine the two sources as well as not sure if using the Drudge site, in the headline as appropriate here.




posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 03:47 AM
link   
Well that would make sites like our beloved ATS unusable.


I mean COME ON, we share news and alternative topics / conspiracy theories and discuss it on here all the time. It's just a greedy corporate attempt to monetize free speech.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 04:32 AM
link   
So basically, if I wanted to post a link to an article, I'd have to get permission and/or pay a fee to the newspaper, magazine or who ever published it, or face charges.
That's insane.
Laws being written by people who have no clue how the internet works.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 04:34 AM
link   
a reply to: dreamingawake

Well they would have to change the whole academic practise of quotes and bibliography then. It is not workable. We do it in writing and we do it in speech. Ridiculous and unworkable just like Merkel's policy on migration.

I wish the EU would jump off a cliff personally. They are good for nothing, totally UNDEMOCRATIC. The commissioners, who are the boring bureaucratic back bone of this hot air balloon of the EU, are NOT elected. It is an assault on national democracy. The commissioners have been held up many times before for corruption. It is a stinking, steaming cess pile. It was designed for the big money so it can flow more easily, just like the horrid little Euro.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 06:33 AM
link   
This is a straight up and blatant attempt on censorship to information and exposing truth.

This needs to end NOW.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: dreamingawake
The source in these articles is a document on Google drive Source which
will not open.

This seems to have to do with the online version of newspapers. More and more of them are requiring a subscription or they give so many days free viewing and then they require you to pay. The links in question were jumping this paywall and going direct to the article.

edit on 10-11-2015 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   
There was a court case some time ago where a website owner had provided a list of links to bootleg copies of TV series and movies that were available online. The relevant trade groups were successful in getting this list taking offline.

But how are you going to stop someone sharing a list of 40 ASCII characters? There are so many ways of encoding this information; using uuencode/uudecode, forbidden prime numbers (which be written to a file and unzipped) to provide the text.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 09:53 AM
link   
These dinosaurs who continue to object to how the free exchange of information takes place on the internet are only placing themselves in a box where the continual development of technology will render them more and more irrevelant.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 12:13 PM
link   
This is absurd. No way this can possibly go anywhere. Just a bunch of old people making a fuss with there last breaths. They have no idea how the internet works,
edit on 10-11-2015 by Tjoran because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:52 PM
link   
This is an example of how greedy corporations ruin good things. They want to make money off of the hyperlink and don't care how it affects others. Like other users have said, it is probably a bunch of old people who don't know how the internet works - so hopefully their ideas don't last. Being able to source information is the backbone of the freedom of information and speech we enjoy on the internet today.
edit on 10pmTue, 10 Nov 2015 13:56:30 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: dreamingawake

How do these media companies in the article stay in business? Other than, obviously, getting laws written which try to shackle the wind.

You think after print took a hit, they would have caught on. So many options to get ahead of this ball and they choose to litigate the world back to the 1920's instead.



posted on Nov, 16 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Revolution9
a reply to: dreamingawake

Well they would have to change the whole academic practise of quotes and bibliography then. It is not workable. We do it in writing and we do it in speech. Ridiculous and unworkable just like Merkel's policy on migration.

I wish the EU would jump off a cliff personally. They are good for nothing, totally UNDEMOCRATIC. The commissioners, who are the boring bureaucratic back bone of this hot air balloon of the EU, are NOT elected.


They are appointed by each country's Governments, just like we don't vote for the PM but rather for the party, who appoints the PM. Both are equally undemocratic.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 06:58 AM
link   
a reply to: moniker

The PM system is irritating.

If we, in Australia, had a system more akin to the US where you could elect the President/PM directly I'd probably end up running for it at some point, with a platform similar to Bernie's since I agree with him on almost all issues.

The sheer, incomprehensible, stupefying failure of almost all our elected officials gives me existential crises over the future of our country and the world. I am 17, I should be worried about girls, not the state of utterly useless government and councils.
edit on 17/11/2015 by Eilasvaleleyn because: Reasons



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 07:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn

If we, in Australia, had a system more akin to the US where you could elect the President/PM directly...


Except technically we do not elect them directly, we have the Electoral College that elects them for us based on us first electing the College and then having them vote according to the amount of votes cast for that particular candidate.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 07:23 AM
link   
True, but that has rarely, if ever, made a different. To my knowledge, at least.

You at least have the illusion of being able to influence your most major representative. Here, we simply roll the dice, and every result is a one. Or, to put it in the terms several P&P RPGs use, a "Critical Failure."
edit on 17/11/2015 by Eilasvaleleyn because: Reasons



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 07:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn

True, but that has rarely, if ever, made a different. To my knowledge, at least.


Then you are obviously not very familiar with United States Presidential elections where the popular vote and the electoral vote differed. This happened several times.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 07:51 AM
link   
I might be confusing it with the... House of Representatives?

Regardless, it seems quite ridiculous that the president is not completely decided by the popular vote. That seems, to me, to be the whole point. Was this current practice set in place at the formation of the country, or later amended into existence by later governments?



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

It was part of the Constitution from its inception.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 08:04 AM
link   
Interesting. It seems to defeat the entire point of a democratic election and be ripe for abuse and corruption, which as far as my understanding extends the Founding Fathers did everything they could to be prevent.

Perhaps I am not quite getting exactly how it works?

Regardless, I feel like we have strayed extraordinarily far off topic by accident.

If this... Whatever it is, passes, I feel like heads ought to roll. Literally. It is completely contrary to the interests of the majority of the world's population. Somehow, over time, governing bodies have actually managed to become even more stupid in regards to the internet, rather than less.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 08:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

They feared that a manipulative tyrant could get themselves elected via direct democracy and the Electroal College was a fail safe to that occurring.



new topics

top topics



 
13

log in

join