Calling all #Fediverse admins of instances in the #EU. The #CopyrightDirective is coming, we need to show the MEPs how massively the EU Internets will be affected.
We are preparing a list of all EU-based #Pleroma, #Mastodon, #GNUSocial, #Peertube, #Funkwhale, and any other instances.
Please *contact me*. All I need is the domain name, which EU Member State it's located in, and the rough topic of the instance. Approximate user count welcome, but not necessary.
Please help. This is important.
It does not matter if your instance is small. It does not matter if your instance is not run for profit.
You *will* be affected by the #CopyrightDirective.
Your instance being on this list will help us make that point.
@rysiek
Non-profit instances will not be affected.
*The article 2.6 definition: ‘online content-sharing service provider’ means a provider of an information society service of which the main or one of the main purposes is to store and give the public access to a large amount of copyright-protected works or other protected subject matter uploaded by its users, which it organises and promotes for *profitmaking* purposes [...]
https://www.article13.org/article-13
@rysiek
Mastodon instances that don't get revenue from advertisement companies are non-profit. It can still receive donations from its users to pay for the hosting cost. That doesn't count as profit. Wikipedia is explicitly mentioned as a platform that won't be affected by article 13 due to being non-profit. But Wikipedia receives donations. So obviously mastodon instances without ads that merely receive donations will be non-profit as well.
@rysiek
I guess if you don't have to pay to use the service and if the service doesn't receive revenue from advertisements or from selling your data, then it is non-profit.
@philonerd I'm going to say: we shall see what lawsuits and chilling effects we see in 2.5 years. You're basing your argument on cuddly promises made by copyright maximalist's propaganda site (look at the About Us section, it's basically copyright collectives, which I can go on a completely separate rant on). I am basing my argument on talking to lawyers and a having been doing reform activism for a decade.
I hope *you* are right.
@philonerd but if you want to see copyright maximalists at work, have a watch:
http://goodcopybadcopy.net/
https://vimeo.com/19941622
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Internet%27s_Own_Boy
Or have a read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sita_Sings_the_Blues#Copyright_problems
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz
@philonerd huge platforms don't care, they have the money to pay for this. Small platforms -- like Fediverse instances -- are going to be screwed with their pants on whenever big business fancies.
@philonerd this whole thing is boxing internet culture in terms familiar to corporate lawyers. It completely ignores small creators (will huge platforms be required to pay them? how?), it completely ignores small platforms (the small-size exclusion expires after 3 years of operation).
We will see the chilling effects in 2 years. And fun copyright lawsuits will start in 2.5 years. Get your popcorn ready.
@philonerd please define what "non-profit" means. Is m.s non-profit? Will masto.host (for-profit hosting personal instances) be affected? From talking to the lawyers: it is not clear.
And you can be 100% sure that the big business will interpret the law in a maximalist way: https://www.nytimes.com/1996/12/17/nyregion/ascap-asks-royalties-from-girl-scouts-and-regrets-it.html
And so, even if you're right there, what if an instance gets sued by big business? Will it afford legal defence?