EU copyright reforms draw fire from scientists

Re:EU copyright reforms draw fire from scientists by TeMPOraL on Friday June 15, 2018 @04:22AM (#17318294)

I think the basis of GP's comment is the bias a lot of GDPR supporters - myself included - have: we'd like to see the entire advertising industry die. So even if the effects hit smaller publishers more than the large ones, as long as it causes enough damage to the whole business model and incentivizes people to look for alternatives, it's a step in the right direction.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:EU copyright reforms draw fire from scientists by JumpCrisscross on Friday June 15, 2018 @05:58AM (#17318632)

> even if the effects hit smaller publishers more than the large ones, as long as it causes enough damage to the whole business model and incentivizes people to look for alternatives, it's a step in the right direction

Remember the adage “divide and conquer”? If you want to destroy something, consolidating its power base (like GDPR does to advertising in Europe) is a poor first move.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:EU copyright reforms draw fire from scientists by ivan_gammel on Saturday June 16, 2018 @06:45AM (#17326889)

That might be a good first move. It's much easier to regulate one or two evil big corporations than a sacred cow of small and medium business.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:EU copyright reforms draw fire from scientists by AnthonyMouse on Friday June 15, 2018 @08:37AM (#17319292)

> we'd like to see the entire advertising industry die

The GDPR doesn't only apply to advertising companies. When you're offering services in exchange for money you still have your customers' names, IP addresses etc. Even if you aren't using any of that information for advertising or data mining, you still have it, which means you still have the compliance cost. A lot of that cost is not proportional to how much data you have or what you do with it.

And that's the problem. The GDPR will never destroy Google or Facebook, but it can destroy a three person startup that has nothing to do with advertising and might have offered an ad-free alternative to some of their services.

If destroying the ad industry is the goal, why not just tax advertising at >90%?

[ Parent | on HN ]