Ooh. Well, i don’t have that, so…
Ooh. Well, i don’t have that, so…
Least Anneli gave us a clarification.
An article by Patrick Breyer talking a look at #ChatControl:
Alright people, the final vote for Chat Control is scheduled on Tuesday, July 6th.
Now is the time to go into full gear on spreading awareness and organizing protests.
Here’s an article by Patrick Breyer on how we got here and what to do when contacting your MEP’s:
So it’s the 6th in France, where the main EU parliament building is.
Today is the day MEP’s vote on Chat Control.
The EU’s chat control regulation has been found to violate fundamental rights by a former judge of the European Court of Justice. According to a representative poll, 72% of EU citizens clearly reject indiscriminate screening of private correspondence. Despite all that, the Parliament’s Committee for Civil Liberties (LIBE) recommends the plenary to vote in favor of chat control.
This is how the subject of Chat Control is being framed in the Plenary:
So, word is that Chat Control passed.
That means it’s up to the courts to strike it down but who knows how much damage it’ll do in the meantime.
Great, just fucking great.
Nothing like Citizens being ignored by their officials.
I’m from the US, so…
Yeah, yet you come from the us.
However i see your point, so i won’t argue with you on that.
Anyway, i do hope they strike it down.
Technically, they are in the us via Cloudflare, so…
@Background Pony #D40B
Not being rude, if i’am, i’m sorryl
So, one of the main parties to blame for approving Chat Control is the Christian Democrats:
These same jerks also voted for the EUCD.
The Greens stood for the common person.
Tomorrow on July 15th, The Advocate General will give their opinion to the CJEU on how platforms like Youtube should/will be affected by the Copyright Directive.
They had previously given an opinion on the matter of copyright before the EUCD come into focus in 2020:
This will be somewhat of an update to that opinion now that the EUCD is taken into account, which also may have some affect on how Poland’s case will be decided down the road.
Please keep an eye out on that matter!
Thanks to Communia, we have the AG opinion.
This comes from a set of tweets by Communia:
“The Advocate General opinion in case C-401/19, the Polish request to annul #Article17 is out. The AG does not recommend to annul #Article17. Instead, implementations must contain safeguards that ensure that only manifestly illegal uploads get blocked. What does this mean?”
“If the Court follows the AG’s recommendation, #Article17 would stay, but Member States will have to make sure that legal uploads are protected from automated filters. Filtering would only be allowed for ‘manifestly infringing’ uploads.”
“Where uploads are not manifestly infringing the content concerned should not be the subject of a preventive blocking measure and rightholders will have to request the removal or blocking of the content in question by means of substantiated notifications.”
“Most (if not all) national implementation that we have seen so far clearly fail to meet this standard and if the CJEU follows the AG they will need to co back to the drawing board (or face legal challenges).”
“The AG opinion also validates the most important underlying principles of the Article 17 guidance that the commission issued last month.
There will be more details in the full opinion and we will be back with a more through analysis later today.”
This here is the AG’s full statement on the matter of Art 13/17 in English:
Republic of Poland
So, good or bad?
Well, that’s good.
Derpibooru costs over $25 a day to operate - help support us financially!