Here's a UK case where a large chain was serving beer using glasses that were too small.
That chain hasn't been shut down, nor fined huge amounts. They weren't even prosecuted. They recalled all the glasses nationwide and replaced them with the correct size.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/03/pint-scam-major-...
This kind of regulation is not unusual.
EDIT just for clarification: I think this is a lousy law, and I hope it doesn't pass in its current form.
I’m Swiss American. My fellow Swissmen are similarly sceptical.
The realistic risk isn’t someone fining everyone a billion dollars. It’s that you didn’t curry sufficient political favour with the right regulator and now get to see their capricious side. These are a legitimate concerns for anyone considering doing business in Europe.
With any website (hackernews included) the only way they can actually completely prevent there from being copyrighted content in the comments that they host and publish is to not offer the ability to comment at all.
We don't really need to link something to express an opinion
BTW HN have to check anyway, if I post a link to an obscure video sharing platform containing copyrighted material, that's an infringement
Even if the domain is whitelisted, say github.com, I could host copyrighted material there
They simply don't do it and rely on users's good faith
Web sites are already responsible for copyright infringements committed by their users
No, of course not. Like I said above, the "link tax" part (article 11) has nothing to do with linking. But even if it would, it still wouldn't have anything to do with the content filter law part (article 13). They're two completely separate things.
It's intentionally vague, because these laws only ever come into play if someone really messes up or is intentionally being deceptive..
If you set an exact limit or try and set exact definitions, people try and use them to create loopholes.. which I personally find to be a very American thing to do.
If you're actively making an effort trying to filter content, you have nothing to worry about. If it can be shown that you're intentionally trying to game the system, you can land in trouble.
It's pretty simple, really.
But you do: you have to worry about filtering content. And you can never know whether you've made enough effort.
You have to have a process, and devote human time to it, and (as I understand it) do so proactively rather than just responding to takedown requests.
Text: "should be effective but remain proportionate, in particular with regard to the size of the online content sharing service provider."
But this is exactly the wrong level of detail; it's not a reassurance because you and I and startups can have no idea what the level actually is. If they'd said "less than X employees or turnover less than X" it would be a specification. Instead it's horrible, expensive vagueness.
>> All the site does is share links to content.
> You kind of answered your own question there.
So we should expect HN to block Europe if this goes through, because otherwise they're liable for all copyright infringement of any linked page?