Difference between revisions of "Copyright/Documentation/Articles/en"
< Copyright | Documentation
(→2017: added article "New leak: Estonian Presidency ignored doubts by 6 Member States about the legality of censorship machine plans") |
(→2017: added article "International coalition joins together to halt potentially harmful copyright reform") |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==2017== | ==2017== | ||
| + | === 6 September : [http://sparceurope.org/copyrightreform/ International coalition joins together to halt potentially harmful copyright reform] === | ||
| + | ; Sparc Europe : ''SPARC Europe is leading and collaborating with an international coalition in an effort to halt the adoption of harmful provisions found in the current draft of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, and certain amendments, which could threaten Open Access and Open Science.'' | ||
| + | |||
=== 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.'' | ||
Revision as of 14:54, 12 September 2017
2017
6 September : International coalition joins together to halt potentially harmful copyright reform
- Sparc Europe
- SPARC Europe is leading and collaborating with an international coalition in an effort to halt the adoption of harmful provisions found in the current draft of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, and certain amendments, which could threaten Open Access and Open Science.
5 September : 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.
