back to article Under-fire Silicon Valley to gain new copyright 'safe harbour' in EU, fume critics

The European Union looks poised to strengthen large internet platforms' position against online liabilities, according to a leak of the latest copyright directive draft dated 23 April. The most recent publicly available draft (PDF) is dated 13 April. Critics say proposed amendments in European law would grant new "safe harbour …

  1. mark l 2 Silver badge

    From my own experience of uploading videos to Youtube that have music playing in them the music rights holders are already grabbing every opportunity to milk revenue out of the stuff people upload to Youtube.

    Even the slightest hint of a song playing in the background even if it just a 30 - 60 seconds long video so not the entire song and the copyright holder will moneytise your video and run ads on it or you have to mute the song or replace it with another, which you then loose any other audio such as people in the video talking.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "and avoid punishment while their websites and services are used by netizens to rip off copyrighted work."

      So good news for freedom of the internet then.

    2. JimC


      Do you upvote this post if you think its a good thing that the music creators get paid, or upvote if if you agree with the premise that you should be able to raid other folks content without permission or payment?

      And indeed the same dilemma could be said to apply to this post.

    3. Youngone Silver badge

      Value Gap

      As far as I can see the value gap is between what the music business wants to charge and what consumers want to pay.

      I wouldn't expect the major labels or their industry groups to understand what their customers want, they have spent the last 20 years ignoring them.

    4. Cederic Silver badge

      Yeah, I have over 1000 videos on Youtube and around 98% are monetised by the music cartels. Several are blocked or muted.

      All of my videos were recorded live at events that had incidental music in the background. The music had already been paid for three times, but no, the music cartels then want to monetise my fucking videos too.

      It's a scam and I really want it stopped. I make no money from my videos, I can't legally commercially exploit them (irrespective of the music) so why the fuck are the music cartels getting to leech like this.

      Sort that problem out, EU. Go on, break that musical monopoly.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Shorten copyright lifetime to the same as patent lifetime.

  3. Kabukiwookie

    Private property

    the cost of policing infringement falls heavily on the rights-holder, and on the small rights-holder even more so. 

    And this is exactly how it should be. If copyrighted material is private property, the cost of monitoring infringement should be borne by the copyright holder. Not paid for by communal taxes.

    If someone trespasses on someone else's property they should take action themselves (with calling the police as an option).

    What's happening now is that copyright owners expect tax paid guard to stand at their driveway.

    If a copyright owner does not want to pay to enforce their copyright, it's apparently not all that valuable.

    1. JimC

      Re: Private property

      Big advertising is acting very like a fence.

      They are receiving stolen property and selling it on at a huge profit. And, just like householders who have had their property stolen, its impractical and ridiculously expensive for the householders to go round all the retailers of "Oh, is it stolen, we had no idea" goods and try and retreive their property.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021