Name: 13条とは何か、どうやって反撃するのか! (What is Article 13 and how to fight back!)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T09:41:50.000Z
Duration: 15 min 21 s
Description: VoiceTubeの動画で発音を聞きながら英語表現を覚えよう！学べる英語：

So this is one of those talking head videos.

Um, really, even meet it if you want to guess.

We're gonna talk about that president that's been set, how dangerous is is and what the future holds.

Potentially what the future could look like because of Article 13 or more commonly known as Article 13.

It's actually European Union directive on copyright.

Yeah, you could tell that was written by old people.

Video is brought to You by Nord VPN service I've been using for a long time, and it's becoming more relevant than ever, as we will talk about in today's video, obviously with the passing of the European Union.

A directive on copyright and specifically Article 13 will be talking about that in today's video.

So we're probably gonna see a huge rise in VPN traffic here in the near future because of net neutrality and now Article 13.

But fortunately, nor VPN has you covered with thousands of servers and more than 61 countries, including you guessed it Europe, in fact, nor VPN even has a campaign going right now to bring awareness to this ongoing issue with a fight.

The Mima Ban with memes competition taking place.

In fact, you guys can find a link down description below.

It's designed to make people aware of what is happening and what we're talking about in today's video.

It's just good practice to protect an encrypt your data when you connected Internet with military grade encryption, you can bet that the I S, P s and the governments and all these other entities will not be spying on your data.

In fact, new users you sign it for, nor VPN using my offer code.

Jay's two cents at checkout can save 75% off a three year membership.

That is a very small price to pay to maintain the open freedom of your Internet experience.

So you guys waiting for a start taking things serious and shove it toe Article 13 by signing up for, Nor dpmne using my link in the description below.

Net neutrality was a big, bad scary thing because it basically gave the eye.

Is peace freedom to lock down the Internet?

If that makes it just such an oxymoron right there because an oxymoron written by morons that being edgy pie net neutrality was good with the battle of Net.

Neutrality was lost because of corporations paying billions and millions and but jillions of dollars toe people like you.

That kind of pales in comparison to what Article 13 can can do to the future.

Because the biggest issue with net neutrality or the lack of net neutrality is the fact that Ice Piece could charge you.

They could charge you to connect to YouTube.

They could charge you connect the Netflix, or they could throw you in it, which they currently do.

They can slow down your Internet connection to these sites because they are banned with hugs.

Or if you want to get full speed, you pay for it.

And thats that's the spirit of non neutrality.

But this isn't a discussion about net neutrality.

And that being eyes, I already mentioned the European directive on copyright.

But European Union directive on copyright.

Now what that basically has is a is a It's a big loss, a big legislative piece of a bunch of old baby boomers that sit around in some Parliament and you're somewhere and to say this is the way it should be done.

Can someone help me log in my ol account?

Just listen to some of the legislators in law.

Passers talk about lawmakers, passers, whatever just listen to it's like listening to them talk about the Internet is like listening to me talk about law.

These lawmakers that pass article 13 still use a trackball.

Someone out there watching us right now is like I still use the trackball if you use the trackball f Article 13 the way thing, okay, To understand what's changed, you have to understand the way things currently work.

Now, right now on YouTube, I'm going to use the United States State, the United States.

Try have a serious conversation, guys, the United States of a one, but understand the potential of how this could all work in the future yet understand how it currently works today, at least yesterday or the day before before it actually went into effect here in the United States.

That's the only laws I know and can go by so I could tell you the way it currently works, at least with YouTube.

YouTube does have to follow the local laws of the areas that they're being viewed.

So if you're viewing YouTube in Europe or your viewing it in China, I think you can view in China maybe on a VPN for your viewing in Korea view in Taiwan or South Africa.

There are local laws have to be a applied to where you're currently watching things, because although the Internet is all encompassing and it can actually entire world, you're still bound by your local loss.

So I am in the United States and those of the laws I know and understand, so that's gonna be referencing.

But it could affect us here because it sets a precedent.

And other governments like to follow suit with those that pioneer and do laws and things first.

And so this could be making its way here.

And the problem is, I see Article 13 and the European Union directive on copyright.

But the old people here in the United States going that sounds like a really good idea.

The way currently works right now is that I upload a video, or Kyle uploads a video that uses any other material.

This is this is content that I own because it's intellectual property.

And if someone takes it uploads that I can legally claimed that content under copyright.

Kyle did that very soon with the Verge PC build, and you all know how that turned out.

He was hit with a couple right strike because someone in the team was like, We don't like what he's saying.

We're gonna copyright it, But he's protected under laws known as fair use here in the United States.

So although Kyle used that piece of content from the verge for a parody that was under fair use in accordance of fair use, which is an actual law here that states that you could do that, you could make parodies you can use bits as long as it's used in a new creative format, and not just a re upload or copyright, you know, just obviously using copyrighted material for the sake of re uploading it in its entirety.

Now, fortunately, the editor in Chief of the Verge agreed that it was an erroneous use of DMC A, which is a digital millennial copyright act similar to Article 13 here in the United States, been abused many, many times.

UM, it was up to the verge to first initiate the copyright strike, and then it was also to the verge to remove it.

Article 13 basically states that it would be up to YouTube now to identify and make sure that cooperated material does not make it on the platform.

Because YouTube does benefit from every single upload that hasn't add on YouTube, they take 40% of the revenue, and as such, if they get 40% of illegal copyright uploaded material, then that makes them basically implicated in the violation as well.

So Article 13 specifically in Europe states that the platform has to be responsible for the copyright, make sure making sure that they're in compliance and not uploading and benefiting from copyrighted material.

In fact, they very clearly state that it's open to interpretation and it's up to the individual countries within the union that being obviously, the European Union, too implement a system that stops the copyright material from being re uploaded.

It's not like YouTube or Twitter or Facebook or Google or whatever hosting platform we'll talk more about that is there are guidelines in here or requirements in here is, too.

Who doesn't have have to have a filter system who does, etcetera, etcetera.

It's not like they receive a list of this is copyrighted.

It's not like they receive a database that says, Here is the image match or the sound match or the sound file or whatever that states.

Oh, this is copyright when it's uploaded.

So how is the platform supposed to know One Because the platform now could be potentially find and held responsible for copyrighted material.

My fear is that the platform's been gonna become extremely sensitive.

So if you thought there were a lot of false positive before, I think this is just the beginning now, in terms of uploading, though, like I said, it's not like I have a database, so there's no way for them to know what is or isn't copyright material.

It is up to the copyright holder to go into the YouTube system to give its samples to say, This is our material.

Remove it when you find it or you have the manual claims like you saw against Kyle.

So the issue there is YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and all the other major platforms are not going to have a mechanism in terms of knowing everything that has copyright compliance.

It's gonna be up to the copyright holder to still feed that data.

Now this is coming directly from wired dot ceo dot UK, so I'll put a link to this article down below.

It says the final wording of article 13 cents out exactly which platforms will need upload filters in which ones will now currently on YouTube.

When I upload something, if I had just and if I'm just erroneous and I say I'm gonna upload this entire fight scene from Avengers Infinity War, it will get captured.

You have a choice as the copyright holder.

Do you want to monetize the material and just redirect the funds to yourself?

字幕リスト動画再生

13条とは何か、どうやって反撃するのか! (What is Article 13 and how to fight back!)

sort

obvious

content

material