On Fri, 7 Sep 2018 18:40:14 +0200 Robin Gareus <robin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Thanks for the concise points. > The worrying part of Article #13 is to introduce surveillance to > enforce Copyright. The presumption of innocence on gets thrown > overboard with this. This would be part of a general way to handle things which could lead to a lot of repression as capitalism-based Western societies are declining and clashes within different aspects of their populations are encouraged by European political figures with their total non-actions. Although Hungary is resisting and perhaps now Italy is joining in. This said, there must be a basis for copyright. It's a bit difficult to imagine, with all the contents being generated and uploaded to the internet at large, that it would go through filtering. The dangerous aspect of it could mean that as a generator of content one would have to submit a registration to a filtering service that would be used to filter other contents. One could then specify that the generated content is free for everyone to share. Or has copyrights. Or anything in between. That submission for registration could offer the opportunity for a central 'agency' to eventually approve or not of the contents itself at the same time. That's the eventual dangerous part. And eventually to categorize individuals in their day-to-day lives based on their uploaded contents. One makes a satirical article about Benalla being Macron's lover ? Rejected and tracked down. > Everything that is uploaded by you must pass an "upload filter". > That filter checks if the content that you post is legal and does not > infringe any Copyrights. Now guess who can afford to pay for that > "filter as a service", not to mention the potential to abuse > [data-collected by] such a central filter. -- In any case this is a > technical solution to a social problem and therefore it won't work to > stop (C) infringement. The cost would not be the prime aspect. It could be 'free'. Like vaccines are 'free'. But yes, a technical solution to a social problem. > Article 3 restricting data-mining to scientific research is another > issue. This discriminates against freelance scientists and artists who > are not affiliated with some organization. This is the part I oppose > most. This would be pretty bad. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
