What do you think about the proposed Article 13?

11개월 전

What do you think about the proposed Article 13?


Article 13 is the big thing right now in Europe.

It is about the copyright of creators.

Some think it is good, some don't care and some take to the streets because they think democracy might be threatened.

What do you think?



  • Pro: Creators get paid

  • Pro: Legal security for users

  • Pro: If we don't do it now we won't have anything for a long time

  • Con: Censorship

  • Con: Technology not existant

  • Con: Small palyers get squeezed out

  • Other

  • I don't know enough about it

Answer the question at dpoll.xyz.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
STEEMKR.COM IS SPONSORED BY
ADVERTISEMENT
Sort Order:  trending

Voted for

  • Con: Technology not existant

Voted for

  • I don't know enough about it

I chose the above mainly because I don't really know all the ends and outs of the legislation, but from what I've read, a few things come to mind:

Original creators should have the right to protect their work. If they give up that right, then second hand creators or common use should come into play. This would be for any work the original creator wants to be paid for or not (perhaps they just don't want a photo they took becoming one million flavors of meme).

Once it's in the common use domain, then that's it. Have at it.

The bit about whose liable for the content should depend on who ultimately owns it. If YouTube owns the rights to everything published on its site, then it should ultimately be liable for it. That might not help the original creator, or for that matter, ease censorship, but if YouTube wants to continue to have control over content and, probably as important if not more to them, generate income, than they must have some level of responsibility.

The problem with all of that is, there are folks who will sue, and while everyone involved is more than happy to take the money a video or article might generate, no one wants to suffer the consequence said video or article might create. There are certainly frivolous lawsuits, so things like libel or slander will need to be determined, but that doesn't mean fault and accountability shouldn't exist.

It's said that there needs to be any laws. It's said that people feel like they can just use whatever they see on the internet without getting permission. Just because its pervasive, doesn't make it right. Just like I can go and take the toy the neighbors left out in the street and keep it for myself. It may be in the public domain, and possession might be nine tenths of the law, but that doesn't mean it's right.

Thanks for contributing to the dPoll content.

You have been upvoted from our community curation account (@dpoll.curation) in courtesy of This Guy... @bluerobo.

Come, join our community at dPoll discord server.


If you want to support dPoll curation, you can also delegate some steem power. Quick steem connect links to delegate:
50SP | 100SP | 250SP | 500SP

Voted for

  • I don't know enough about it

Voted for

  • Other

That was a typical multichoice poll... I see the listed pros and cons, no one answer.

Voted for

  • I don't know enough about it

Voted for

  • Con: Censorship

Voted for

  • Con: Censorship

Voted for

  • I don't know enough about it

Voted for

  • I don't know enough about it

Congratulations @stratton.npc! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You made more than 1750 upvotes. Your next target is to reach 2000 upvotes.

You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!