* Chris Lamb: > Would there any strong objections to the Project aligning itself > against the new EU copyright review? For more background, here's a > recent Linux Journal article about this reform attempt: > > > https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/how-eus-copyright-reform-threatens-open-source-and-how-fight-it
Which part? I think the upload filters are fairly sensible, and Debian would implement them if required in practice. For us, infringing content is low-quality content, and we train our users to avoid uploading it. This is different for the likes of Youtube and Github. I find it also problematic to suggest that copyright infringement is somehow necessary for a thriving free software ecosystem. I find Title IV, Chapter 3 (“Fair remuneration in contracts of authors and performers”) far more problematic because as written, in seems to effectively ban irrevocable free software licenses: | Article 15 | Contract adjustment mechanism | | Member States shall ensure that authors and performers are entitled to | request additional, appropriate remuneration from the party with whom | they entered into a contract for the exploitation of the rights when | the remuneration originally agreed is disproportionately low compared | to the subsequent relevant revenues and benefits derived from the | exploitation of the works or performances. <https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-593-EN-F1-1.PDF> (Apologies if this is not the current version.) Germany already has similar provisions, but they exempt free culture/free software licensing: these provisions do not apply to works for which everyone has been granted basic exploitation rights. So yes, we should do something about Title IV, Chapter 3, but I expect that we'd be pretty much alone in that.
