The only reason why they done is because it's mandatory under the impending legislation in EU [0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_on_Copyright_in_the_...

So it is the might filter and pre-cursor of preventive censorship in the EU. Marvellous.

Not sure what are you trying to say, but no law gets anything right. That said, the current market is very one-sided where platforms abuse both sides (creators and rightsholders) while nobody can do nothing about it. So I welcome the governments trying to find balance, even if it’s not perfect.

I think the law is cutting way too far in one direction, but I believe this is the first time the market has an opportunity to work together to find some form of balance.

Everyone has different standards. To me this is unacceptable - we used to pay so much money to all those unelected people and their duty was to get things right for citizens, not for big corporations (who likely also pay them through unofficial channels). I am glad that my country decided to not implement that in full once we have left the bloc.

I’m very biased here, but I think the law is going to eventually be net positive not because is so good, but because there is another (DMCA in US and E-commerce directive in EU) that allow platforms to use content without compensation.

This is unsubstantiated in increasingly connected world where digital content (and rights) are structural to its operations and business. This law is far from perfect, but it’s seeking to remedy this imbalance. I agree that this could’ve done better, but we live in imperfect world with lobbing being part of the process.

So my hope and believe, one I built my company around, is that this law will allow to create balanced marketplace (similar to VISA) that allows all 3 sides (creators, platforms and rightsholders) to participate in the upside rather than focus on a zero-sum outcomes as it’s today.

I might be naive and completely wrong, but this is what I’m personally working towards.