Now signs that it may not be far away with the promise of the Federal government are increasing. A previously unreleased study by the FDP-affiliated Friedrich Naumann Foundation suggests. This comes to the conclusion that the upload filter in the implementation of the Directive into national law can hardly be avoided, although they are not prescribed as the official measure in the Reform. The dispute flared up is always to article 17 of the EU copyright reform, which should take the platform operator in the future for copyright infringement liability. To avoid this, you need to put the provider on the automated processes of upload filters; the Google subsidiary, Youtube uses this for a long time with varying degrees of success.
the study by the Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung notes: "in The run-up to the EU copyright law reform expressed the principle of criticism, that article 17 is ultimately forced to the introduction of upload filters for the operators of platforms result in the framework of the national implementation does not dispel; for this, the EU legislator has been granted but Implementation is not enough." The plans of the Ministry of justice could limit the impact of such a Filter, however, is "a little", as it should in the future be exceptions for "de minimis uses" as well as a lump-sum compensation by means of compulsory licences.
the Internet economy has disappointed
the Internet industry Association, Eco, expressed disappointment about the discussion draft. In order to upload the filter would not be excluded, even for smaller providers. In order for the Federal government to remain clearly behind their promises in the Protocol Declaration to the Council decision, in the case of Germany, a vast abandonment of upload filters in the implementation of expressed.
The Federal Ministry of justice wants to avoid the upload filter is the fact that users can in the future sign your posts as exceptions to the code. In order to make it clear that in this case, there is no copyright violation and the contribution must not be blocked. Finally, a main charge, the Software would often work to be inaccurate and also remove posts that have an in-depth examination, no violations. However, this mechanism reaches its limits, if the marking is to be used by users abusive. Then, the automatic deletion will be used again. "The identification of allowed uses by the user may allow the upload filter on the first glance superfluous," said the Eco-Board Chairman Oliver Süme. "There is, however, content to block, their identification 'is clearly wrong', it's more of a Placebo effect."
The list of criticisms is so long, that the Friedrich-Naumann-Foundation chooses a very pragmatic approach: it recommends that the implementation of article 17 in such a way that the scope is as small as possible to limit the difficulties, in practice, at least to a smallest possible circle of people.Updated Date: 13 August 2020, 13:20