Skip to main content


 

European Copyright Reform: Article 13 puts alternative social networks at risk


If you live in the European Union, you have probably heard about the planned European Copyright Reform, and you are probably aware of its controversial Article 13.

The so-called Proposal for a Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market intends to introduce new regulations around copyright. Article 13 would add new liability rules for online content-sharing service providers. While previously, providers could act on content that infringed copyright upon receiving a notice, the proposed regulations would render providers accountable for content as soon as it has been uploaded.

Effectively, this would put providers into a position where they have to implement strict upload filters to prevent users from uploading content that may infringe on someone else's copyright. This is dangerous, and it puts free speech, the diversity of opinions, and the internet as a whole at risk.

Article 13 previously contained rules to exclude platforms younger tha... show more

As far as I am aware, the Article 13 only applies to commercial providers. That would mean that providers of alternative social networks, such as #diaspora pods, are not affected as long as they don't pursue a commercial interest.
I could even imagine that, with Article 13 in effect, more people are switching to alternative social networks with non-profit background to host their content. That would be even good news for diaspora...

you can host his own content ? and his own social network ?
if the podadmin ask money , it become "commercial provider", no ?

@Eckhard I strongly suggest reading previous discussions before commenting.

Which previous discussions do you mean, @Dennis Schubert?

Hm. Looking at your pod, it seems a lot of comments went missing. Weird. Here is the full history - including comments explaining why the exceptions are a joke.

Comments on joindiaspora seem to match pod.diaspora.software. I see Dennis Schubert explaining,

"That’s a common excuse, and while it’s legally valid, it misses some points. As soon as a podmin receives a single cent donation, and is not explicitly recognized as a non-profit org by their local tax authorities, this single cent “donation” is a legally relevant financial transaction, and by definition, that pod would be for-profit."

and telling people to talk to their lawyer on both threads.

Thanks for the link, @Dennis Schubert. I had some issue with federation last month, thats maybe the reason I didn't get all the comments.

So... if Article 13 becomes thruth, I could either officially found a non-profit organization, or refuse any donations.

Or, the hard way, shut down the pod :(

@Eckhard it pretty much seems to be like that. Or wait what happens and deal with the development then.

Now it is here and we can move our pods to Amazon AWS or Ms azure and they have do deal with all the copyright sh**.
Let's see what this does to open Plattforms and backup services. Especially do I have to give a license to the backup service owner? Are we still allowed to encrypt our stuff?

Still I see that it doesn‘t affect non-profit parties/organisations. When I understood correctly from this discussion, it only seems to be an issue that non-profit and for-profit cannot clearly be differentiated as soon as a pod receives donations and is not an officially registered NPO.

But wouldn‘t it be possible to register an non-profit association (something like „diaspora e.V.“) with respective terms and statutes, where pods can join as members? Wouldn‘t that solve the problem for most of us?
As a side effect, the membership fees could help to sponsor some development effords or the like...

No, that wouldn't work, as that non-profit org wouldn't run the pod, their podmin would. The non-profit org neither owns the server, nor is it responsible for it, both of which can't be fixed for obvious reasons. A imaginary "diaspora e.V." could collect donations, but as soon as the money is transferred to the podmins, the situation would be exactly the same: a not-legally-non-profit person receiving money.

A possible workaround would be to have that e.V. pay for the servers directly, but that would put the pods into 100% dependency of that e.V., effectively creating a single point of failure for those pods, governed by a central entity (that e.V.).

Still a long way to go, approval by the states, implementation, lawsuits, ....

In the short term the more interesting question will be how well the pirate party does in the EU elections

#article13

Given the second in line and Reda's exit.... I hope "Die Partei" does much better.

@Andrea Borgia don't believe she left the party because of that, she just took this as a (welcome) reason to leave. ;-)

2Die Partei" is only a VOMEDY Project, n o t a real politcal party, so far, afak.. But mayybe sooner or later..... ahahahahahahaha.. maybe they might somewhen start trying 2 become real POLITITICIANS??? Will they but tell us, when this point will happen, this maybe Switching point, or will it re,ain COMEDY ndevertheless???

What about moving pods out of the EU? And what is the impact to US managed pods?

Moving servers outside the EU doesn't work. When the administrator and/or the targetted group is European, then european rules apply.

@Michael Vogel lets buy a limited when GB left the EU to run the pods/servers or lets found a non profit in Switzerland, that is quite easy I hear.

But no, that is not the solution to a problem cause by politicians being controlled by lobbyists.

@utzer perhaps so, but still a no-go for me.
Anyhow, I'm waiting to see the regional candidates, I was pretty pleased with my choice last time.