How do you like it if there's no sooner to be seen on the Internet through Article 13?

Youtube, twitch, instagram, facebook, whatsapp, etc. Are known not to conform to Article 13, as in the practice of the companies can't be guaranteed that in a file upload by a user is not a legal violation in the file (copyright, etc.). A legal offense would be present if you already have a logo of McDonalds in his photo, or a Lets Play Video or make-up video of the latest Lip Gloss makes, because you are not in possession of the appropriate licenses (the products are all protected). Companies such as Google or Facebook, which offer such websites, would then have to fear fines of billions.

Therefore, allegedly, these websites will soon no longer be offered within the EU, so that one can hardly call websites as EU citizens.

How do you like Article 13 of the EU and how can Article 13 be stopped?

In my opinion, Article 13 is completely pointless… I think how it is actually quite good and do not see the benefits of Article 13 at all…

The concept of the whole directive is good, but the (current) implementation is bad.

It probably will not be as bad as you describe. Before content is deleted / locked by the filter (automatic recognition software), the right owner must request this and make an image available to the provider. In your examples, the rights owner (e.g., McDonald's or game developers) harms himself. If a creator shows a logo in the video, it's free to advertise him. Viewers become aware of the company and, for example, buy their products. Games also sell better, if you already have an insight of independents. Here it is also free advertising.

According to the proponents' dreams, the major platforms already have licenses with the major providers of copyrighted content. So comes the e.g. The McDonalds logo did not even materialize.

The platform is also not liable for any injury. They have to do the best possible and then they are out. It will cost a lot of money for the change, but the penalties will probably be lower.

Twitch and WhatsApp should be partly "protected". Filtering a video is one thing, but filtering a video stream in real time? How should livestreams reach the user without much delay? The computing power would probably have to be greatly increased and that costs a lot and thus it falls out of the possible. Facebook can't filter the chats on WhatsApp because they are end-to-end encrypted. Only the chat partners can see the content. Messenger should not be affected.

Answer to your question: Only the European Court of Justice can stop the article. Therefore, by demos, petition, etc., attention is drawn to the maladministration of the article.

I'll correct your text:

"Youtube, twitch, instagram, facebook, whatsapp, etc. Are known not to conform to Article 13 …" - Correct: "Youtube, Instagram and Facebook are not in their present form with Article 13 compliant"

"A legal offense would be present if you already have a logo of McDonalds in his photo, or make a Lets Play video or make-up video of the latest lip gloss" - Correct: "A legal violation is already before Art. 13, if you already have a logo from McDonalds out of Panoramic Freedom, or doing a Lets Play video, nothing will change that. "

"Companies such as Google or Facebook, which offer such websites, would then have fines worth billions." - Correct: "Companies like Google or Facebook, which offer such websites, would then have to fear fines in the billions, unless they would then use any recognition software."

"Therefore allegedly these web pages are soon no longer offered within the EU, so that one as EU citizens can barely call websites." - "Therefore supposedly these websites will soon no longer be offered within the EU, so that you as EU citizens can hardly call websites, wrote the Google chief and lied to us, because an upload filter costs less than to renounce the clientele in the EU. "

You just think too small. There's much more than yt. What about imgur, vimeo, and the thousands of other sites and startups that have neither the money nor the power to switch such a filter before? The complaints are already coming, so thousands of these pages will soon go offline within the EU.

Why do you assume something like that? You do not know how I think. You obviously do not know that I'm aware of the harmful effects on small businesses, artists and journalists. I only correct your false statements.

The only thing I find worse than half-truths of the pro-art. 13-page are false statements from the Contraseite. These ensure that the contraseite is not taken seriously and that people can't inform themselves reasonably.

And how come you think that imgur and vimeo have neither options nor money for filters? We can sweep away "possibilities", at most because of missing money, but you have already separated. We can at least sweep away money at vimeo, presumably also at imgur.

Your commitment in honor, really. But writing inappropriate stuff and imputing anything to strangers only harms the thing you want to stand for. Please leave that.

After I look at your profile, I prefer to listen to you for answers. You do not just pronounce false statements and subordinate to any reason, a look at your profile already shows insults like "cavemen" and blessings like "Opi, your generation has failed for 30 years.".

In short, you only troll and indirectly support only the side that you claim to fight with your inhuman behavior.

Even for a monster like Google, it's technically not possible to build an EU compliant filter that can match petabytes of content in real time. Anyone who has a clue about the matter, will ask whether in the EU Parliament too much is thrown or whether the really are completely remote from reality.

Such articles come from the opis.

And this comment has just underlined it.

In any case, you have no idea of the magnitude behind it