News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:EU copyright law proposal rejected by fauigerzigerk on Thursday July 05, 2018 @07:03AM (#17462290)
The text and data mining restrictions are anything but reasonable. Why on earth should there be an additional copyright for processing data automatically when you already have the right to process the same data manually?

This kills European AI startups or drives them away.

Re:EU copyright law proposal rejected by teamhappy on Thursday July 05, 2018 @07:11AM (#17462324)
They're copyright exceptions, not restrictions, meaning you don't need a license to process copyrighted data for scientific research.
Re:EU copyright law proposal rejected by fauigerzigerk on Thursday July 05, 2018 @07:12AM (#17462330)
They are exceptions for research and restrictions for startups at the same time.
Re:EU copyright law proposal rejected by teamhappy on Thursday July 05, 2018 @07:25AM (#17462391)
I don't get it. How is giving more rights to researchers restricting startups?
Re:EU copyright law proposal rejected by fauigerzigerk on Thursday July 05, 2018 @07:35AM (#17462432)
More rights compared to what?

What matters is that EU AI startups are more restricted than US startups.

Re:EU copyright law proposal rejected by ginko on Thursday July 05, 2018 @07:45AM (#17462473)
I'm pretty sure US startups also have to respect copyright law when mining data on the internet?
Re:EU copyright law proposal rejected by hsivonen on Thursday July 05, 2018 @08:31AM (#17462700)
The U.S. has Fair Use, which adapts to novel cases. The EU has enumerated exceptions to copyright.
Re:EU copyright law proposal rejected by pbhjpbhj on Thursday July 05, 2018 @08:55AM (#17462849)
As a simple example ripping a CD is tortuous in the UK. It was briefly allowed for format shifting, but that was deemed too antithetical to capitalism, or some shit.

Schools have to have PRS (songwriters) and PPL (musicians) collection agency licenses if they have TV because the license they pay for TV doesn't cover the music "performamce" eg of an adverts soundtrack.

Individual solo workers can't listen to a radio at work unless they're unable to be accessed by the public.

You can time-shift a TV show (say), but you're only allowed to watch it alone, and you can't watch it twice.

UK is draconian in the extreme.

Personally I'd favour a 15 year term, and only for works that have an identical un-protected copy lodged with a central agency (at a high cost), or are DRM free. Transfer/download rights for copies bought on streaming services; format shifting, relaxed time-shifting, more educational use rights, etc..

Re:EU copyright law proposal rejected by fauigerzigerk on Thursday July 05, 2018 @07:55AM (#17462528)
Of course they do, but US startups are facing far fewer restrictions on mining data published in their home market.

Large internet companies like Google and Facebook will face even fewer restrictions because they have the clout to force economically viable terms on publishers.

Re:EU copyright law proposal rejected by merinowool on Thursday July 05, 2018 @07:26AM (#17462396)
EU needs reason for having more bureacrats. More regulations - more bribery, more people involved - diminished responsibility. I am glad UK decided to pull the plug just at the right moment.
Re:EU copyright law proposal rejected by fauigerzigerk on Thursday July 05, 2018 @07:38AM (#17462443)
The UK has two members on the legal affairs committee. The Labour member voted in favor of the copyright directive. The conservative member abstained.

There is very little chance that the UK will have substantially better rules than the EU post Brexit.