We already talked about it at the end of June. The law he would have, in all likelihood, gagged us too, it didn't pass. At least for the moment…(n.d.r.)
STRASBOURG – The European Parliament blocks copyright reform. L’Eurocamera, meeting in plenary in Strasbourg, rejected the start of negotiations with the Council (318 no, 278 yes and 31 abstained) on a proposed directive that had split the Assembly in half. Now the discussion of the proposal is postponed to the next plenary, in September, but it is likely that the text on the digital single market is destined to run aground on further amendments between now and the end of the legislature. Also because time is running out: in May 2019 we return to the polls for the European elections and the assembly that is expected to be "quite different".
The unknowns of September
At least to use the euphemism of a European Chamber spokesperson. The topic has never been easier, but the situation became heated after approval, last 20 June, of the amendments of the Legal Affairs Committee. The changes to the articles sparked the controversy 11 e 13, i.e. the obligation of economic recognition of the contents disseminated by the platforms (item 11) and installing a “filter” to prevent copyrighted material from being uploaded online (item 13). Actually, the directive concerns more the relationship between online platforms (come YouTube o Google) and publishers and end users. The intention of the text is to regulate the economic recognition of copyright in the Web era, replacing a regulatory system stuck at 2001.
The two articles of contention
But what do the articles that provoked the clash say in detail?? The article 11 became known as the “link tax”, even if there is no mention of taxing hyperlinks: the law provides that publishers have the right to «obtain fair and proportionate remuneration for the digital use of their publications from information providers (the platforms already mentioned above, ndr)».
Translated into practice, the publication of so-called snippets (article clippings that copy-paste the title and first lines of an article, then referring to the link) must be tied to a license, to financially reward the owners of the rights. The article 13 instead it requires «signing licensing contracts with the owners of the rights, unless they intend to guarantee a license or it is not possible to stipulate one". In the absence of an agreement the famous upload filter is triggered, the content filter that recognizes and blocks those protected by copyright. «The platforms – we read in the text – they must undertake, in cooperation with rights holders, appropriate and proportionate measures leading to the non-availability of works or other subject matter infringing copyright or related rights, while those who do not break these rules can remain available".
COPYRIGHT / The victory Wikipedia
What happens now
"Politically, the directive is dead", many commented, in Strasbourg, after today's vote. In fact, it's easy to think that this is the case. Now the proposal will be discussed again at the next plenary, but the process that is announced is anything but easy: the text will have to undergo new amendments and attempt to move towards approval by the end of the legislature, perhaps trying to "leapfrog" to the next meeting. But it should reach everything within a few months, in a Parliament at the end of its mandate and with the lobbying activity of companies and activists always on the alert.
A transversal vote
Apart from the Populars, united in favor of the reform, the vote split halfway between yes and no Social Democrats, Alde and other formations. The list of our MEPs covers the entire parliamentary spectrum, by Isabella Adinolfi (Five stars) to Mario Borghezio and Mara Bizzotto (League) to Elly Schlein and Flavio Zanonato (Possible, Free&Equal). As was already hypothesized on the eve, the question has escaped logic (and control) of the direction of political forces, delivering a map of the hemicycle that is difficult to classify by ideological tendency or nationality. The weight of the external pressure was certainly felt, exercised by digital giants such as Google and other companies. "Even Wikipedia intervened, that had nothing to do with it" many blurt out as they leave the plenary.
«Let me be clear, no one is against the protection of artists. It's just that the directive needs to be improved", says Adinolfi, espousing an interpretative line that is popular among those who voted against: the proposal needs to be discussed further, not sunk. Times and procedures permitting, given that the work should be compressed into the few months preceding the May vote. "We see. It's sad that MEPs have to choose in this climate" says Lodovico Benvenuti, director of the European office of the Ifpi (International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, the organization representing the interests of record producers).
Lega and M5S celebrate
M5S and Lega rejoice, the two parties that were most against the directive. «Today is an important day, the tangible sign that something is finally changing also at European Parliament level", underlines Luigi Di Maio. «The Strasbourg plenary session rejected the copyright mandate to the rapporteur Axel Voss, dismantling the system of the gag directive. The European Commission's proposal therefore returns to the sender remaining a dead letter, the signal is clear: no one should be allowed to silence the network". Matteo Salvini's comment is along the same lines: «Gag on the internet and Facebook now rejected in Strasbourg also thanks to the League's no: they won't stop us".
The publishers: shameful interference from the web giants
The result of the intense lobbying activity carried out by the internet giants and those who thrive by stealing valuable content from publishers as well as a "shameful" interference with the democratic legislative process carried out through exaggerated and false arguments: this is the harsh comment expressed in a note by Carlo Perrone, President of the European Publishers Association (Enpa) to the vote with which the European Parliament postponed the examination of the EU copyright reform.
The socialists: received death threats
In recent days, numerous MEPs have received serious threats, "even of death" on the proposed copyright reform. The Socialists and Democrats group denounces it (S&D), to the European Parliament. «Copyright reform is a highly debated topic – said Group leader Udo Bullmann – and creates strong tensions. Passionate debate is an essential part of the political process, but we must ensure that the limit is not crossed. It is unacceptable that numerous EU parliamentarians have been subjected to serious threats.".
Source: http://mobile.ilsole24ore.com/solemobile/main/art/mondo/2018-07-05/copyright-parlamento-europeo-rimanda-settembre-direttiva-121700.shtml?uuid=AENe2UHF&refresh_ce=1