Article 13

Why focus on Article 13?

The EU’s Digital Single Market directive is a case study in political failure. Despite public protest and objections from experts, MEPs voted in a directive based equally on wishful thinking and technological illiteracy. We deserve better political leadership, capable of navigating issues like this in the actual public interest.

This prompted the creation of this site, using this event as a starting point. We welcome ideas on how to expand this model.

What's wrong with Article 13?

This part of the directive is meant to shield small artists from lost income on big internet platforms. In reality it forces big internet platforms to strictly police what users upload, at their own liability. Any prior claimed material must be filtered. Instead of the flag-and-review model that is currently the norm, it shifts to block-and-appeal.

This is managed through complex and expensive content ID systems. Only organized rightsholders have the resources to administer such a catalog, and only big tech can afford to build and run such a system. Royalties are also paid out based on content ID, so it is in the copyright industry’s interest to claim as much content as possible.

This is mainly a conflict between technology giants and the copyright industry, not the public. The copyright industry may say it protects small artists, but the public outcry shows there is a large segment of popular culture that lives entirely outside their influence, that they nevertheless lay claim to. This sort of content is already threatened under the old system, with creators often self-censoring and muting music in fear of demonetization or other penalties, despite fair use.

Somehow, in order to protect us from big tech, it was necessary to force big tech to police us even harder. The public got dragged into the debate against their will, and was told to accept this change in policy. The pressure came from the same organizations that have been trying to clamp down the internet for 20 years now.

The net effect is that the copyright industry will now get to enforce their favored business model on the European internet, and probably beyond. What little reprieve there is to protect small platforms is only temporary, there to give them enough time to grow into another Google- or Facebook-style enforcer.

This is all supposed to occur without compromising mere critique or parody, when it may have numerous knock-on effects on education, research, archival, whistleblowing and more.

What can be done about Article 13?

As an EU directive, it is still up to each individual member state to implement it in the next 2 years. There is still time to apply pressure and change course.

With the upcoming European election in May 2019, it’s also important that our representatives are held accountable. If they don't receive critical feedback from ordinary citizens, and are rewarded with votes regardless, no real change will happen. Let them know why you will or won't vote for them, if they are up for re-election. You can gather the details on My Reps.