Copyright/Documentation/Articles/en - Revision history

Vanecx: /* 3 November : [https://walledculture.org/does-copyright-give-companies-the-right-to-search-your-home-and-computer/ ] */

2021-11-03T14:11:57Z

3 November : [https://walledculture.org/does-copyright-give-companies-the-right-to-search-your-home-and-computer/ ]

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:11, 3 November 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== 2021 ==		== 2021 ==
	=== 3 November : [https://walledculture.org/does-copyright-give-companies-the-right-to-search-your-home-and-computer/ ] ===		=== 3 November : [https://walledculture.org/does-copyright-give-companies-the-right-to-search-your-home-and-computer/ Does copyright give companies the right to search your home and computer?] ===
	; Walled Culture : ''Copyright has mutated into a monster because it was never designed to regulate activities, as it does with software, just static objects like books and drawings.''		; Walled Culture : ''Copyright has mutated into a monster because it was never designed to regulate activities, as it does with software, just static objects like books and drawings.''

Vanecx: /* 2021 */ added "Does copyright give companies the right to search your home and computer?"

2021-11-03T14:11:50Z

2021: added "Does copyright give companies the right to search your home and computer?"

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:11, 3 November 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== 2021 ==		== 2021 ==
			=== 3 November : [https://walledculture.org/does-copyright-give-companies-the-right-to-search-your-home-and-computer/ ] ===
			; Walled Culture : ''Copyright has mutated into a monster because it was never designed to regulate activities, as it does with software, just static objects like books and drawings.''

	=== 27 October : [https://www.wired.com/story/ebooks-drm-blind-accessibility-dmca Blind People Won the Right to Break Ebook DRM. In 3 Years, They'll Have to Do It Again] ===		=== 27 October : [https://www.wired.com/story/ebooks-drm-blind-accessibility-dmca Blind People Won the Right to Break Ebook DRM. In 3 Years, They'll Have to Do It Again] ===
	; Wired : ''Baked into Section 1201 of the DMCA is a triennial process through which the Library of Congress considers exceptions to rules that are intended to protect copyright owners. Since 2002, groups advocating for the blind have put together lengthy documents asking for exemptions that allow copy protections on ebooks to be circumvented for the sake of accessibility. Every three years, they must repeat the process, like Sisyphus rolling his stone up the hill.''		; Wired : ''Baked into Section 1201 of the DMCA is a triennial process through which the Library of Congress considers exceptions to rules that are intended to protect copyright owners. Since 2002, groups advocating for the blind have put together lengthy documents asking for exemptions that allow copy protections on ebooks to be circumvented for the sake of accessibility. Every three years, they must repeat the process, like Sisyphus rolling his stone up the hill.''

Vanecx: /* 2021 */ added "Blind People Won the Right to Break Ebook DRM. In 3 Years, They'll Have to Do It Again"

2021-10-28T10:43:30Z

2021: added "Blind People Won the Right to Break Ebook DRM. In 3 Years, They'll Have to Do It Again"

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:43, 28 October 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
			== 2021 ==
			=== 27 October : [https://www.wired.com/story/ebooks-drm-blind-accessibility-dmca Blind People Won the Right to Break Ebook DRM. In 3 Years, They'll Have to Do It Again] ===
			; Wired : ''Baked into Section 1201 of the DMCA is a triennial process through which the Library of Congress considers exceptions to rules that are intended to protect copyright owners. Since 2002, groups advocating for the blind have put together lengthy documents asking for exemptions that allow copy protections on ebooks to be circumvented for the sake of accessibility. Every three years, they must repeat the process, like Sisyphus rolling his stone up the hill.''

	== 2019 ==		== 2019 ==

Vanecx: /* 2019 / added article "Study: Hadopi Has Been Great For Big Artists And Labels, Bad For The Spread Of Culture And Smaller Or New Artists"

2019-12-23T17:20:19Z

/* 2019 / added article "Study: Hadopi Has Been Great For Big Artists And Labels, Bad For The Spread Of Culture And Smaller Or New Artists"

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:20, 23 December 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
			== 2019 ==

			=== 20 December : [https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20191219/09254343602/study-hadopi-has-been-great-big-artists-labels-bad-spread-culture-smaller-new-artists.shtml Study: Hadopi Has Been Great For Big Artists And Labels, Bad For The Spread Of Culture And Smaller Or New Artists] ===
			; TechDirt : ''The point of copyright is absolutely not to create a music industry monoculture where only a few artists get noticed and survive. Yet this study seems to show that's what Hadopi did. ''

	== 2018 ==		== 2018 ==

Vanecx: /* 2015 */ added article : "The Rhetoric of Copyright Extremism"

2019-02-02T23:49:41Z

2015: added article : "The Rhetoric of Copyright Extremism"

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:49, 3 February 2019
Line 26:		Line 26:
	=== 5 September : [https://juliareda.eu/2017/09/censorship-machines-concerns-ignored/ New leak: Estonian Presidency ignored doubts by 6 Member States about the legality of censorship machine plans] ===		=== 5 September : [https://juliareda.eu/2017/09/censorship-machines-concerns-ignored/ New leak: Estonian Presidency ignored doubts by 6 Member States about the legality of censorship machine plans] ===
	; JuliaReda.eu : ''Last week we learned that the Estonian Council Presidency endorses the European Commission’s plans for censorship machines – a planned law that would force online platforms to surveil all user uploads in search of copyrighted content. Six EU member states expressed doubts about the legality of this proposal, we learn today in a new leak. Statewatch made public a list of legal questions put to the Council’s own in-house legal service by Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Ireland and the Netherlands. But the Estonian presidency didn’t care: They launched their proposals without waiting for the legal service to answer the questions – and without adequately addressing most of the specific concerns put forward.''		; JuliaReda.eu : ''Last week we learned that the Estonian Council Presidency endorses the European Commission’s plans for censorship machines – a planned law that would force online platforms to surveil all user uploads in search of copyrighted content. Six EU member states expressed doubts about the legality of this proposal, we learn today in a new leak. Statewatch made public a list of legal questions put to the Council’s own in-house legal service by Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Ireland and the Netherlands. But the Estonian presidency didn’t care: They launched their proposals without waiting for the legal service to answer the questions – and without adequately addressing most of the specific concerns put forward.''

			== 2015 ==

			=== 27 July : [https://www.communia-association.org/2015/07/27/rhetoric-of-copyright-extremism/ The Rhetoric of Copyright Extremism] ===
			; Communia Association : ''However, we observe that rhetoric around ratcheting up extreme copyright protections plays a major role in the mainstream of regulatory conversations around copyright, while rarely recognized and called out as extremism. Rather, even the most far reaching positions are considered perfectly legitimate when brought forward in committee hearings, policy papers or campaigns. In a way, current copyright discourse is heavily skewed towards the side of copyright extremism, which makes any moderate and balanced reform of copyright laws difficult, if not impossible. ''

	== 2013 ==		== 2013 ==

HgO: added article "EU wants to require platforms to filter uploaded content (including code)"

2018-03-15T12:30:25Z

added article "EU wants to require platforms to filter uploaded content (including code)"

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:30, 15 March 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
			== 2018 ==

			=== 14 March : [https://blog.github.com/2018-03-14-eu-proposal-upload-filters-code/ EU wants to require platforms to filter uploaded content (including code)] ===
			; The Github Blog : ''The EU is considering a copyright proposal that [https://savecodeshare.eu/ would require code-sharing platforms] to monitor all content that users upload for potential copyright infringement (see the [https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/proposal-directive-european-parliament-and-council-copyright-digital-single-market EU Commission’s proposed Article 13 of the Copyright Directive]).''

	==2017==		==2017==

Vanecx: /* 2017 */ added article "Copyright Law Makes Artificial Intelligence Bias Worse"

2017-11-01T11:57:39Z

2017: added article "Copyright Law Makes Artificial Intelligence Bias Worse"

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:57, 1 November 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==2017==		==2017==

			=== 31 October : [https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/59ydmx/copyright-law-artificial-intelligence-bias Copyright Law Makes Artificial Intelligence Bias Worse] ===
			; Motherboard : ''Much of the data used to train algorithms is protected by copyright restrictions in the United States, and courts haven't yet decided whether training an AI amounts to infringement. Due to potential legal implications, major AI companies keep the data they use to train their products a secret, preventing journalists and academics from uncovering biases, as well as stifling competition. ''

	=== 2 October : [http://copybuzz.com/editorial/upload-filters-copyright-magic-pixie-dust/ Upload filters, copyright and magic pixie dust] ===		=== 2 October : [http://copybuzz.com/editorial/upload-filters-copyright-magic-pixie-dust/ Upload filters, copyright and magic pixie dust] ===

2017-10-22T08:34:14Z

2017: add article "Upload filters, copyright and magic pixie dust"

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:34, 22 October 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==2017==		==2017==

	== 22 September : [http://copybuzz.com/analysis/ec-diagnosed-ostrich-syndrome-missing-study-piracy/ EC Diagnosed with © 'Ostrich Syndrome': Missing Study on Piracy] ===		=== 2 October : [http://copybuzz.com/editorial/upload-filters-copyright-magic-pixie-dust/ Upload filters, copyright and magic pixie dust] ===
			; Copy Buzz : ''Last week, the European Commission unveiled a major initiative aimed at tackling “illegal content online“. As is so often the case when politicians want to be seen to be “doing something” about terrorism, it’s full of really bad ideas.''

			=== 22 September : [http://copybuzz.com/analysis/ec-diagnosed-ostrich-syndrome-missing-study-piracy/ EC Diagnosed with © 'Ostrich Syndrome': Missing Study on Piracy] ===
	; Copy Buzz : ''German MEP Julia Reda (Greens/EFA) published a ‘new’ copyright study [PDF] from the European Commission (EC) titled “Estimating displacement rates of copyrighted content in the EU”. Yes, you’re reading the 1st paragraph correctly, an MEP published a study from the EC. If this sounds weird to you, that’s about right, and we know the feeling. So, before we dive into sharing some of the study’s findings, let’s first give you some insights on why this study is not so ‘breaking’ as one would assume, and how and why MEP Reda needed to dig it from under the sand and publish it online herself.''		; Copy Buzz : ''German MEP Julia Reda (Greens/EFA) published a ‘new’ copyright study [PDF] from the European Commission (EC) titled “Estimating displacement rates of copyrighted content in the EU”. Yes, you’re reading the 1st paragraph correctly, an MEP published a study from the EC. If this sounds weird to you, that’s about right, and we know the feeling. So, before we dive into sharing some of the study’s findings, let’s first give you some insights on why this study is not so ‘breaking’ as one would assume, and how and why MEP Reda needed to dig it from under the sand and publish it online herself.''

Vanecx: /* 2013 */ added article "Sharing is a cultural right, not a market failure"

2017-09-25T18:14:07Z

2013: added article "Sharing is a cultural right, not a market failure"

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:14, 25 September 2017
Line 20:		Line 20:
	=== 25 March : [http://www.digitalstrategyconsulting.com/intelligence/2013/03/online_piracy_does_not_hurt_the_music_industry_ec_study.php Online piracy ‘does not hurt the music industry’- EC study] ===		=== 25 March : [http://www.digitalstrategyconsulting.com/intelligence/2013/03/online_piracy_does_not_hurt_the_music_industry_ec_study.php Online piracy ‘does not hurt the music industry’- EC study] ===
	; Digital Strategy Consulting : ''Illegal downloading has little impact on music sales and actually drives consumers to make legal purchases, according to a new study published by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre.''		; Digital Strategy Consulting : ''Illegal downloading has little impact on music sales and actually drives consumers to make legal purchases, according to a new study published by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre.''

			=== 7 June : [http://paigrain.debatpublic.net/?p=7306&lang=en Sharing is a cultural right, not a market failure] ===
			; Philippe Aigrain's blog : ''An endless stream of law proposals, soft-law initiatives and free-trade agreements keeps trying to eradicate or prevent the non-market sharing of digital works between individuals. New strategies are pushed using incentives and threats so that intermediaries will police the Internet to save the scarcity-based business models of a few from the competition of abundance. So is it business as usual? Well, no longer.''

2017-09-25T17:14:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:14, 25 September 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==2017==		==2017==

			== 22 September : [http://copybuzz.com/analysis/ec-diagnosed-ostrich-syndrome-missing-study-piracy/ EC Diagnosed with © 'Ostrich Syndrome': Missing Study on Piracy] ===
			; Copy Buzz : ''German MEP Julia Reda (Greens/EFA) published a ‘new’ copyright study [PDF] from the European Commission (EC) titled “Estimating displacement rates of copyrighted content in the EU”. Yes, you’re reading the 1st paragraph correctly, an MEP published a study from the EC. If this sounds weird to you, that’s about right, and we know the feeling. So, before we dive into sharing some of the study’s findings, let’s first give you some insights on why this study is not so ‘breaking’ as one would assume, and how and why MEP Reda needed to dig it from under the sand and publish it online herself.''

	=== 20 September : [https://juliareda.eu/2017/09/secret-copyright-infringement-study/ What the Commission found out about copyright infringement but ‘forgot’ to tell us ] ===		=== 20 September : [https://juliareda.eu/2017/09/secret-copyright-infringement-study/ What the Commission found out about copyright infringement but ‘forgot’ to tell us ] ===