So what’s this EU article 13/17 that everybody’s posting about? All I picked was - websites will have to remove copyrighted contents. I don’t see what’s so new about that. Like fb YouTube etc already remove copyright content.

I don't know for sure, but I think it's the very very something like that. But don't hold me to that lol

You're wrong. Remove AND prevent repetition. Otherwise, not the user, but the platform operator is in for a fine.

Upload filters are not reliable enough except if they produce so many false positives that upload isn't possible anymore.

This means not only bye bye YT (or it turns into some Netflix), it is also the end of private forums in the EU as copyright also extends to written content, and actually, of any internet with user participation.

Welcome back to the web 1.0 which was a static read-only web. This is how Europe imagines the future.

@Fast-Nop YouTube will be fine. They have the ressources.
I'm more worried about startups and privacy: https://reddit.com/r/opensource/...

@kolaente
"They have resources"
If by resources you mean exponentialy increasing computing performance the yes.
Imagine how effective the algorithm must be that checks every second of your video that you upload vs THE WHOLE HISTORY OF YT.
(Unless they only do it for big corporations because small creators can suck dick, or they deal with it using law magic)

@Gregozor2121 doesn't just have to check against their own library, they also have to filter against every copyrighted work in the world. Including on comments

@epse
Well. Checking videos is troublesome enough, but thanks for the details.

What does this mean for devRant? :(

@Fast-Nop are other countries affected as well by this? And why youtube have to comply to this?

@Devnergy uhm, there are a lot of countries in the EU, and all of them will be affected. The problem with YT is that Google does business in Europe, too, so they will have to comply with local laws.

If Google doesn't, they can get fined, as seen in the EU billions fines for violating antitrust laws.

@Fast-Nop It's easier to control people's opinions that way. That's the whole deal behind it. Do you know just how much money there was lost in, say, the insurance business, because people started reading finance blogs and realizing that maybe a life insurance isn't the best way to invest money? That's just one example of someone who has a clear case against free speech. I'm sure we could find dozens more, but I haven't had my coffee yet.