Skip to main content

Did the European Parliament just outlaw the only Europe-made social network with #Article13?

Am I supposed to remove OEmbed and OpenGraph previews to comply with #Article11, because news sites can't just not put the OpenGraph tags on their pages, the main purpose of which is to generate previews?

@Gargron Do what you seem necessary, but please make the commit easily findable, I'd want to revert it.

Seriously, what the fuck do I do now

@Gargron Nothing. At least, nothing yet.

@Gargron Go to the Winchester, have a pint, and wait for this whole thing to blow over.

@Gargron No need to panic just yet. This still has to be approved by the Council then to be converted into law by all member states, which could take until 2021 or later. See the EFF's summary: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/03/eus-parliament-signs-disastrous-internet-law-what-happens-next

@Gargron @cwebber
Not sure - isn't Mastodon "non commercial" ?
ActivityPub Implementors could/should build a foundation together - also for my WebSub Hub the "non profit" aspect in 11 and 17 seems to be the only option. EU is fucked up now.

@sl007 @cwebber In at least some jurisdictions, such as Germany, any website open for public use is considered commercial.

@Gargron @cwebber My lawyer says NOT if is ran by foundation - I am in Hamburg ;) An e. V. might do it - he checks now …

@Gargron @sl007 @cwebber Regarding Mastodon in particular: I would wait for how the final implementation is going to look like. The wording in the Directive ("which it organises and promotes for profit-making purposes") is different and more explicit wording from what German courts consider "commercial" websites ("geschäftsmässige Telemedien").

Regarding the Directive the general: I would fight for a reasonable implementation into local law, and, most importantly, would vote on May 26th...

@Gargron if you are small or don't have any income you don't have to filter.

@Gargron Wait.
It is just a guideline .. and every country now has 2 years to interpret this regulation and convert it into their own law however they please...
After that you 'just' have to adhere to your local law. And within the EU you can freely move and live under a different interpretation.. or rent a server in a different jurisdiction..

And there will be lawsuits in-between meaning it could take >2 years to get this into local law.. or to get it overturned.

@Gargron Can you tell me what part in particular has you concerned? I just re-read it, and it certainly seems bad, but I don’t see it as catastrophic. What am I missing?

@a There is no method by which Mastodon could filter uploads against copyright violations.

@Gargron By end users to a site, or via federation? The former seems solvable; the later gets rough.

@a I don't know if posts from the federation also need to be filtered when they come in, but either way you are supposed to have "automated" filters, and if you magically had those, there would be no difference between local/remote.

Block links to all traditional news sites. Don't show previews for them. Especially the germans and french. It seems quite possible that google will do the same.

Everybody else: don't give them money. Whom? Start here:

https://www.enpa.eu/sites/default/files/inline-files/yes2copyright.pdf

https://www.manifesto4copyright.eu/creatives

Find out who from your country voted pro 13. Convince everybody to never vote for them again. Go to EU elections.

@Gargron @a

@Gargron @a Good. Even if there was, it should NEVER be implemented. I would literally fork the project if the original code was ever infected with such a thing as automated #censorship filters.

@Gargron @a

«Article 13's provisions target commercial web hosts which "store and give the public access to a large amount of works or other subject-matter uploaded by its users which [they]organise and promote for profit-making purposes"».

I don't think this applies to the Fediverse, really. It's more like an abstract portrait of YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc.

@Gargron split the main instance in sufficiently many independent smaller chunks that they fall under the exceptions?

@Gargron Move to the US?

... no, wait, that would be a bad idea for other reasons. 🤷‍♀️

@Gargron read the laws and figure out what you're *actually* required to do, instead of listening to memes on the internet?

@Gargron
Reach out to people organizing against it and do work to promote their struggles.

Boost all the protest locations and use it to connect people who would otherwise deal with this alone.

Use that clout!

@Gargron i just heard on the radio an interview to an italian MEP and he said "for websites with no revenues from ads nothing change". Mastodon should be safe then🤔

@Gargron
Just continue as normal. You as a developer will never be responsible. These new laws don't affect open source projects.

It will technically only affect instances, but only larger for-profit instances. I think that they will not go after small non-profit websites. These laws are unclear about non-profits.

@Gargron AFAIK Articles 11 and 13 only affect big companies (>3 years old, >50 workers and a lot of money, I can't remember the number). The fediverse is safe. I'll send you more details when I have the time.

@Gargron Honestly I'd just an opt-out option for those and that's it. Even if they finally pass this and make is as terrible as it can be, it's responsibility of the people who run the site, not the authors of the software.

@Gargron Then you can toggle that option for your instance.

@roobre #Article11 is stupid, but at least compliable. #Article13 is not compliable.

@Gargron But I wonder how they plan to implement this in practice. They must at least give some margin of error, because no one can make a filter good enough to not miss at least some slight percent of the links.

@Gargron Maybe wait until the individual member states implement this new directive into their laws, and then see what needs to be done?

@gargron wouldn't leaving the OpenGraph tags in imply consent for being thumbnailed? Like, if you specifically publish content to display previews, surely you can't argue "we didn't want to be previewed" ??

@Gargron It'd probably be admin responsibility, not developers. So some option for turning it on/off would be good.

@Gargron wait for the European Council's decision on 6th April. It's the last instance that can prevent the directive from becoming law.

@phoe It passed through at least 3 such barriers already. I have no more faith.

@gargron I have heard, that only commercial platforms with more than 50k users fall under the copyright directive's definition of 'platform'... so you might have a chance. But you will probably have to ask a lawyer :/ And let's wait for the national implementation first.

Maybe this means that the Internet as we know it will only keep existing on non-commercial and decentralized services from now on.

@Gargron You could wait until you get sued… 😬
As long as details have not been discussed when the EU directive in question is actually going to be transposed, it's difficult to re-act/act proactively. The main problem will be that local transpositions might differ between member states.

@Gargron I would guess that previews are by definition fair-use, aren't they?

@Gargron @GidiKroon Do you need to put up a prominent donation scheme on Mastodon to help pay for the lawyers?

@Gargron hey Eugen, let's talk. The directive will take a couple of years to be transposed into law, and we can work to get as broad as exceptions as we can get (plus fight this in the courts). The good news is that I think mastodon is a great example to show politicans and judges. That's all the good news I have for now though :(

@mala Sure, I'm around almost all the time.

@Gargron I would argue that OGTags are essentially consent to be displayed. But I wouldn't want to take it to court.

@Gargron Please don't do anything: This will NOT affect #Mastodon in and of itself. Unless they conduct door-to-door persecutions against people who own instances worldwide, they cannot do anything against non-corporations anyway.

@Gargron Maybe you should reduce the duration for storing IPs, or make it configurable.

@gargron "mastodon? I dont listen to that"

@Gargron You can implement Google filters into Mastodon.

@Gargron time we move our wagons to the Principality of Sealand, huh?

@Gargron
yes, and they're blissful and proud

@Gargron Don't worry about that. You got to keep in mind that Mastodon is a decentralized social media.

@Gargron There's an exception for free encyclopedias.

We're all just producing encyclopedic content here.

@Gargron #Article13 will only apply to commercial platforms, thus it's only for commercial instances. Even if that wasn't the case, they could do nothing against individuals who run instances, unless they literally arrested thousands of people who will not obey this piece of shit law.

@Gargron Article13 clearly makes an exception for non-for profit providers of services. So if your instance or any other is non-for profit, Article13 is not applicable. I'm no lawyer but when reading this Wikipedia link I figure most Mastodon instance are non-for-profit or can be made non-for-profit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organization#Nonprofit_vs._not-for-profit

@Gargron Let's wait and see if there are any complaints. If yes, we are there to help you...

@Gargron
No, they did not outlaw Mastodon. I don't understand were people get that.

@gargron @Jewbacchus depends on the national implementation, and what the judges say about this, I think. Mastodon is probably small enough to keep doing this first.

@Gargron

i am now imagining a Glam Dwarf raising his guitar over his head and declaiming "I am Owie, son of Zowie, son of Bowie!!"

Content warning: Nothing will stop Mastodon and the Fediverse from succeeding.