Tom’s hardware – EU Expected To Pass Censorship Machines, Link Tax On June 20

Tom’s hardware – EU Expected To Pass Censorship Machines, Link Tax On June 20

The European Union and the U.S. Congress are working on reforms to their respective copyright laws, some of which have been deemed too extreme by critics. The EU, for instance, would like force websites to enable “upload filters” and to pay for linking to other websites, while the U.S. Congress would like to extend copyright to 144 years from the already quite long 70 years + life.

EU Copyright Law Changes
As soon as June 20, next week, the European Parliament will vote a draft legislation proposed by the European Commission (EU’s executive body). Critics have attacked the proposal as being quite extreme because it could impact many digital industries too severely.

Censorship Machines (Article 13)
One of the biggest issues with the new EU copyright reform proposal is the Article 13, which mandates that websites that accept user content (anything from videos to online comments) must have an “upload filter” that would block all copyrighted content that’s uploaded by users. Critics, such as Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Julia Reda, have also called upload filters “censorship machines.”
Under the censorship machine proposal, companies would be required to get a license for any copyrighted content that is uploaded to their site by its users. In other words, websites would be liable for any content their users upload to the site. It goes without saying that this could significantly hamper innovation on the internet.
For instance, YouTube or a site like it, probably wouldn’t even exist today if the site would have been liable for what users uploaded from day one. Not to mention that at the time the technology to identify potentially copyrighted content was quite rudimentary. Even today, YouTube has its occasional PR scandal over taking down content that shouldn’t have been taken down. Furthermore, those types of takedowns likely happen on a daily basis to many people, but they just don’t get enough media attention to turn into an issue for Google.
Some argue that upload filters wouldn’t be able to recognize “legal uses” of copyrighted content, even if they were 100% effective in identifying whether or not a piece of content is copyrighted or not. In this category would enter parodies, citations, and even internet memes, which typically make references to copyrighted content.
According to Reda, upload filters have already been made illegal by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which ruled that an obligation to filter all user uploads violates the fundamental rights to privacy, freedom of expression, freedom of information and freedom to conduct a business.

Impact On Foreign Companies
Article 11 and Article 13 of the new copyright directive look like they would have a much bigger (and probably negative) impact on companies operating in the EU than the GDPR did. The GDPR, although supported by most internet users, has already put many foreign companies on edge. Many either don’t show their content to EU users, have put it behind a paywall, or simply don’t fully or properly company with the law.
If the new copyright directive passes, most American companies may simply decide that serving EU users is no longer worth it, which most likely wouldn’t be positive outcome for the EU as a whole.
If you’re an EU citizen and would like to express your opinion to your MEPs, Mozilla has created a free calling tool, while the EFF and multiple European groups have developed an easy web tool to email your own MEPs.

On June 20, an EU committee will vote on an apocalyptically stupid, internet-destroying copyright proposal that’ll censor everything from Tinder profiles to Wikipedia (SHARE THIS!)

The European Union is updating its 2001 Copyright Directive, with a key committee vote coming up on June 20 or 21; on GDPR day, a rogue MEP jammed a mass censorship proposal into the draft that is literally the worst idea anyone in Europe ever had about the internet, ever.
Under “Article 13,” sites that allow the public to post anything that might be copyrighted — text, pics, videos, games, sounds, code — will have to run user submissions through a copyright filter that will check to see if it matches the a known copyrighted work. It’s YouTube’s perennially busted, overblocking Content ID, but for everything from Github to the copyrighted images on that band tee you wore in your Tinder profile.
These black boxes will have the unaccountable power of life or death over everything Europeans say to each other online. They’ll ingest everything we say to each other — likely sending it to one of the giant American tech companies that specialise in this kind of filtering — and render a judgment.
Anyone can add to the blacklist, too: under Article 13, sites have to let people claim new copyrighted works — but the rule has no penalties for abuse. Trolls can lay claim to every word ever posted to Wikipedia and stop anyone from quoting it on a WordPress site or Twitter or Facebook.

Wikipedia Is An Establishment Psyop

Wikipedia Is An Establishment Psyop
If you haven’t been living in a hole in a cave with both fingers plugged into your ears, you may have noticed that an awful lot of fuss gets made about Russian propaganda and disinformation these days. Mainstream media outlets are now speaking openly about the need for governments to fight an “information war” against Russia, with headlines containing that peculiar phrase now turning up on an almost daily basis.

Here’s one published today titled “Border guards detain Russian over ‘information war’ on Poland“, about a woman who is to be expelled from that country on the grounds that she “worked to consolidate pro-Russian groups in Poland in order to challenge Polish government policy on historical issues and replace it with a Russian narrative” in order to “destabilize Polish society and politics.”

Here’s one published yesterday titled “Marines get new information warfare leader“, about a US Major General’s appointment to a new leadership position created “to better compete in a 21st century world.”

Here’s one from the day before titled “Here’s how Sweden is preparing for an information war ahead of its general election“, about how the Swedish Security Service and Civil Contingencies Agency are “gearing up their efforts to prevent disinformation during the election campaigns.”

 

EXCLUSIVE: Hijacked by pro-vaccine troll Dr. David Gorski, Wikipedia publishes deceitful entry on VAXXED documentary

This story has been updated to include Dr. David Gorski’s username on Wikipedia

Wikipedia seems like a good place to get fast information that’s at least somewhat reliable, right? Wrong. The truth is that Wikipedia is nothing more than a trove of disinformation and propaganda peddled by industry gatekeepers, intent on maintaining their ominous facades while upholding the lucrative empires that largely enslave us all, i.e. the pharmaceutical industry and its costly vaccine market.

Most of you have probably heard about the firestorm caused by Andrew Wakefield’s explosive documentary VAXXED, which details decades of scientific fraud covering up the link between vaccines and the injuries they routinely cause.

Well, Natural News has now learned from trusted sources that Wikipedia’s incredibly biased entry on VAXXED was written by none other than pro-vaccine shill Dr. David Gorski, notorious for his relentless and callous attacks on vaccine skeptics, alternative medicine, and its supporters.

‘Birds of a feather flock together’
Gorski is a surgical oncologist at the Karmanos Cancer Institute, the same health group where cancer fraudster Dr. Farid Fata leased office space to maim and kill cancer-free people through aggressive chemotherapy and radiation treatments.

Fata, who received a 45-year prison sentence, also undertreated cancer patients, laundered money and defrauded the government out of $23 million in a scheme labeled the biggest case of health fraud ever to be observed in the U.S.

It’s reasonable to ask: What ties did Gorski and Fata have that haven’t been disclosed yet? We do know that Gorski and his team of skeptics have administrative privileges on Wikipedia and have utilized those controls to attack the natural health field and its supporters.

Our sources say Gorski is using the name “MastCell” to write entries on Wikipedia.

“Wikipedia’s health topics have long been hijacked by vaccine sociopaths and paid pharmaceutical shills. Dr. David Gorski is the top disinfo coordinator for Wikipedia, giving him a platform to reflect his internal psychopathy and pathological hatred for all things holistic and natural,” said Natural News’ Adams, author of Food Forensics, science lab director of CWClabs.com and creator of Medicine.news.

Wikipedia’s entry on VAXXED preferentially gives the floor to the documentary’s attackers, listing five nasty and discrediting reviews calling the film a “hoax,” while accusing it of relying “on tons of random factoids positioned out of context to drive home his [Wakefield] agenda.”

“Casual readers” code for industry henchman
Another VAXXED “review” featured by Wikipedia, Gorski and his team of skeptics, accuses the documentary of putting “the viewer through a well-trod gauntlet of emotional pleas, context-free statistics… and shadowy conspiracies.”

Read more at:

http://www.naturalnews.com/053719_David_Gorski_Wikipedia_VAXXED_documentary.html