Article 13.
The so called Meme Ban.
The end of Pewdie Pie and the killer of Youtube.
Prepare of total devastation…or don’t… a lot of people are calling it game over for
our favourite social media platform… but is that actually true.
Hello and welcome back to Life's Biggest Questions- I am your host Rebecca Felgate and today I
am asking Will Article 13 Destroy Youtube.
Before we get into this video I want to ask you guys if you live in Europe and also what
you think about Article 13.
If you haven’t heard of it yet, don’t worry… you are about to find out.
Also please do leave a thumbs up on this video and share it with a friend.
Okay so article 13 refers to an Amendment of the European Copyright law which was passed
in September 2018 and could come into effect early 2019.
A lot of people in the online content creation industry are very against the change in law,
including the creator of the World Wide Web himself, Tim Berners-Lee.
While at the moment the law looks set to affect member countries of the European Union, it
also could set a precedent and become international law, which could be devastating for a whole
heap more content creators across the world.
So what is article 13?
Well at the moment, under current law YouTube isn’t responsible for copyright violations,
it only has to act to remove content when directed to do so by the copyrights holders…so
when videos get flagged.
Why does the law need to change?
Well the general concern is that more and more people are listening watching and reading
copyrighted material without the actual creators being not only credited, but properly paid
for it.
An amendment to article 13 would mean that Youtube, and all other content creation platforms
like it, would be legally obliged to police copyrighted material themselves.
This would mean the platform developing costly and stringent automated filters to scan every
piece of uploaded content and stop anything that might violate copyright from being uploaded.
Currently Youtube has a Content ID system that automatically compares the content of
new videos to a database of copyrighted video and audio and lets copyright holders decide
whether to block a video that uses their content or run ads against it.
I have used it a few times – It works.
The new law with simply eradicate that system, replacing it with a far more vicious alternative.
Rather than warnings, people will simply get copyright strikes – but beyond that, as
Youtube is now liable for hosting any copyright content – it will mean peoples videos will
be blocked from being uploaded and likely that their future videos will be blocked too.
There simply aren’t enough humans to look into this on a case by case scenario.
This means that people are even more at the cruel mercy of the youtube bots.
AND it gets even worse, this doesn’t just apply to all future uploads, it also applies
to all prior uploads using copyrighted content – those videos will not just be demonetized
but removed and the hosts channels in jepordy.
This is something Pewdie discusses in depth in his November 15th Pewd News video.
The criticism a lot of people have thrown at the lawmakers here is that they don’t
totally understand what is within the law, what the specifics are and what this will
apply to and not apply to.
At the moment, when people use copyrighted content they are allowed to do so so long
as it is fair use – which youtube breaks down into purpose, nature, amount and effect.
Fair use typically is applied to news stories, discussion videos, education videos and parody
videos and it is hard to tell what article will mean for the existing fair use policy…..which
seems like a good time to talk about the meme ban.
So article 13 has been labelled the meme ban.
Memes are murky water when it comes to fair use – they are technically fair use as they
are used for parody but the generally include copyrighted images or material.
The worry now is that platform such as youtube, facebook, twitter, Instagram and beyond will
deploy stringent copyright scanners that wont account for fair use like memes.
They will simply see a content match and punish the uploader, despite the tone and intent
of their post.
Who would this effect then - so Youtubers that use any coprighted material – pictures,
music, even musical sequences, videos, audio….
In the EU they wont be allowed.
This applies to huge channels like Philip deFranco, H3h3, Pewdiepie, News channels,
a lot of educational channels that rely on visual stimuli and list channels….so our
very own most Amazing Top 10 would no longer be able to talk about any movie, artist or
news event – or we could… but we couldn’t use anything visual or audio to illustrate
the point, which would kind of suck for viewers.
It would also apply to parody channels, mash up channels, highlights channels, gamers…
Not that this is the focus of the video – but Twitch as a whole platform would be in total
jepordy.
So, yeah… we have just been talking about big channels… millions of small channels
would also be punished without their brand and name to fall back on.
While a lot of you watching may think, oh well…it is only in Europe…one…Europe
is massive and any content creators uploading within the EU would be punished and many obliterated
– it would also mean that videos North American creators upload would not be shown in Europe.
Without the European audience a lot of people would lose viewers and thousands, if not millions
of dollars of revenue.
Also with less eyeballs on content, advertisers would be less willing to advertise their products
on youtube, which means less ads to generate revenue anyway.
That is youtube and all youtubers business models….take a huge bite out of it…and
it will certainly, certainly hurt.
But what are the options here?
Well all isn’t lost.
Firstly, vloggers, videographers and musicians are all creating 100 percent of their own
content would be okay….however any musician that was covering another or even sampling
another would have their video blocked and their channel penalized, which isn’t great.
I don’t love mashmellow but anything he mixes would be done.
Unless you only wanted to watch vloggers and 100 percent original music and film creations
that use absolute no audio and visual citations from anything else… a solution would need
to be created in the form of copyright licensing…perhaps more people would pay subscriptions to Getty,
or buy music licensing to use… but how would Youtube know they bought the rights?
They wouldn’t…they would simply remove them with their new system.
The other solution is a whole wealth of copyright free images and sounds being created to use….
But then doesn’t that take all money out of creativity?
If people are providing pictures and music for free with no copyright for people to use
in their videos….what does that mean for the value of artistic creation?
Beyond youtube, this new change in law tugs at some pretty intense questions?
Should article 13 really be influencing art and creation in this way?
Is that not a complete violation of creativity?
Also…who are the EU to be deciding what people put into their art and what they avoid?
Again…isn’t that one step further towards a police state.
I for one feel uncomfortable with this… and to be honest Youtube is one of the least
of my concerns….and it is my job.
SO Article 13 really could hurt youtube…not destroy it as there are ways to work around
the law, but those ways will end up diminishing the platform, which as a knock on effect could
destroy it and its business model.
The way to help is to be active in the conversation.
Youtube are encouraging people to discuss the issue with the hashtag save our internet.
I don’t think anyone disagrees that artists should be paid for their work, but article
13 doesn’t seem like the best way forward.
So guy what do you think – let me know your thoughts – Would you watch youtube if it
were just vloggers ? Even they better steer clear of vlogging parties for fear of capturing
copyright music….and they had better not turn on their car radios.
Better they just stay indoors.
Wont that be a fun watch!
LIKE SHARE
Comments : What If The Gigantophis Snake Didn’t go Extinct :
Avery Lopez Baines said: What if Anacondas were bigger than humans??
Max Schmidt said: I hold a young crocodile but if somebody would give me any kind of
snake I would start scream and never come back?
A good question from Shandrewick Key: I would like to ask, is it possible for two different
giant constricting snakes such as the Reticulated python and the green anaconda to cross breed
with each other, if it is what would the python-anaconda snake hybrid look like??
I think we will leave it there because I always like to end my videos with deep questions
about snake sex….