I guess that's okay, as long as the EU provides those upload filters. Or a machine-readable specification of one. And as long as the EU is penalized for false positives.
The checksum is clearly not enough in this case, so EU administering bodies would have to set up a really sophisticated system - and in countries where getting even an appointment date to the social healthcare system is nigh impossible I see literally zero chance for such a backend (so everyone's on their own).
In this case what's happening here is that we are killing the internet as we know it (or knew it five years ago). Government bodies most of the time are incompetent in IT (unless they have an ulterior motive, like large scale censorship or surveillance), so you're probably better off relying the giants' service and create a facebook page, or a google doc, instead of building something on your own (creating a gray net).
There are many worst case scenarios with this law. Facebook and Google creating a new Internet, government bodies setting up "copyright servers" (with advanced data mining capabilites), link tax rendering hyperlinks feared, extortion schemes by shady organizations and lawyers, implementation tax for software development, fear of innovations et cetera.
Like universities and DARPA?
Universities depend on governmental funding to a certain extent, but they have their own freedom - though I still can't see how the next Facebook or next Google or the next super intelligent state firewall will emerge from a research project.
This basically depends on how high the bar for due diligence is set. Will the regulatory bodies provide a certain set of filter criteria that the companies have to implement and everything that isn't being caught is not their problem? Then it's not that big of a deal and might be a good idea to catch the worst offenders and hold platforms accountable.
Is it going to end in countless copyright lawsuits against platform owners just because some content escaped them? Then it'd be a nightmare.
I think there is some healthy middle-ground. Platform owners should have to face some duty to see that their platforms are used in lawful ways, (akin to say owners of a bar not allowing illegal gambling under their noses), but it shouldn't interfer too strongly with regular, legitimate business.
Do you realize how wrong that sounds? The EU should provide upload filters for all companies that put content on the internet? Wow! Yeah, let's make everyone have to get approval from Brussels every time they publish anything. What could possibly go wrong?
(Not disagreeing, I just want to say that I think this idea is fundamentally broken beyond repair)
There's not much of a practical difference between the two.
Edit: It's okay to disagree with my comment. But why not share your view with us instead of just downvoting me?
I would also like a new YouTube to have a similar shot at existing and not “close the door” by legally requiring programs that only large existing companies can implement.
I doubt they'd have made it out the other side had Google not acquired them.
I haven't read the proposed EU regulation, and it sounds like there's a bunch more stuff in it.
It would have been nice if Techdirt had a clear link to the proposal.
Some channels get some money before they get closed though.
YouTube alone has one 300 hours of video uploaded every minute. How are they to determine whether any of that is infringing on someone else's copyright without error or trampling on Fair Use / Fair Dealing?
They even have some videos explaining what copyright-infringement is?
If a uploader is reported or found uploading any videos which breaks there terms of service for three times, your account is going to be permanently banned.
They do have complex algorithms, which searches for matching video content, once your video is uploaded, some uploaders just get away, by decreasing the screen size or by adding some watermarks or logos ...
It’s simpler, more ethical, and more effective to punish the offender.