One thing I found interesting about this video was the origin behind the Internet’s creation, the fact it was created to increase survival odds in the event of a nuclear war is mindboggling to me. Even though the Internet is used by the public today, I believe the reality that the Internet was created by the government with the intention to chiefly be used by the government becomes extremely apparent in modern times with increasing attempts made by governments to control what gets put on the Internet and who has access to engage with content.
The introduction of Article 13 in the E.U. is one of the best examples in highlighting the former as it requires content to be from a ‘trusted party.’ I cannot stress how much I feel that this resolution is a slippery slope in terms of censorship and expression. Additionally, the legislature seeks to force action from private companies that they already take, such as striking copyrighted material when being made aware of it through user reports and flagging. I also find the idea of making companies liable for copyrighted material that slips through to be completely asinine, all it will do is force private companies to create superfluous guidelines and be even more rigid in their enforcement of copyright policies, lest they face a costly lawsuit. The only companies that have the resources to screen every upload to their sites are major tech companies, such as Google (which owns YouTube) or Facebook. In turn, this has the potential to create a monopoly on video and image sharing platforms as the only ones able to compete in the market are those that have the financial means to effectively screen thousands of hours of content daily for copyrighted material and settle copyright lawsuits for copyrighted content that may slip through. At which point, the only players left standing are large corporations, who have unfettered access to publish what they deem appropriate and deny publishing what they disagree with, all under the guise of keeping copyrighted material off their platforms, their newest legal directive.
Furthermore, there’s the added difficulty of internationally enforcing this article, European Union member states all have their own respective differences in copyright law, which complicates whether to enforce Article 13 or a member state’s laws when the two are in direct opposition. There also remains the fact that this article is only passed within the European Union and only takes effect within the various member states within the E.U. This raises the issue of how one could reasonably enforce this European resolution against a company based within the U.S. if they are accused of harboring copyrighted material on their platform. On further reflection, I think this might change the jurisdiction in which many copyright claims are tried. When accusing a platform of not regulating copyrighted material or even just turning a blind eye, it becomes beneficial for the accusatory party to have the trial held somewhere within the European Union where Article 13 is in effect, thus increasing their chances of winning the case and collecting a sizable settlement.