EU wants to filter all code uploaded to the Internet

A proposal from the European Union requires all platforms hosting content to check all uploaded content for copyright infringement, which may make the software more expensive.

• A copyright proposal considered by the EU requires all platforms that host a large amount of content uploaded by users to scan all content to ensure that there is no copyright infringement.
• The proposal aims to prevent the media from pirating, but it may seriously affect the majority of developers who use services such as the code repository GitHub. According to the new law, GitHub will be forced to filter the code.

The EU’s consideration of a copyright proposal is intended to make it more difficult for pirates to share content and media, but this network is so widespread that it may inadvertently hinder programmers.

As GitHub pointed out, automatic filtering code is devastating for independent programmers and large enterprise programmers. Problems may include false positives/false negatives, missing dependencies, confusion of licenses, and unnecessary burdens that stifle innovation.

The copyright proposal is still under discussion. Some people have begun to make every effort to stop the implementation.

Article 13 of this proposal is specifically devoted to the implementation of automatic content filters, which is a part of GitHub and other European programmers who are deeply concerned about.

Article 13 states: “If providers store a large number of works uploaded by users or other topics and allow the public to access these contents,” they must cooperate with copyright owners and implement measures to prevent the contents from being illegally shared.

“Those measures (such as the use of effective content recognition technology) should be appropriate and proportionate,” said the proposal. Article 13 further mentions that content recognition technology is part of the best practice for discovering copyright infringements, so the filter is likely to be part of the final clause of any new copyright law passed.

However, what types of content are filtered are not clearly defined. Sprinkling such a large network has left members of GitHub and Save Code Share deeply concerned that the European Section of the Free Software Foundation and the Open Forum Europe have jointly initiated Save Code Share, a petition aimed at preventing Article 13 from being implemented. EU policymakers reconsider or reject Article 13. They believe that it is not feasible for developers who deal with code, documentation, audio, and video to fully automate copyright compliance checks.

If that is the case, the code-sharing platform will need to hire a large number of people to help do a good job in copyright compliance, and Facebook and YouTube and other social media platforms have done so before.

Regardless, the large amount of content shared through the use of Git and other software tools requires platform-development companies such as GitHub to implement automated filtering mechanisms to determine what content can be shared and what can’t be shared.

Abby Vollmer, GitHub’s policy manager, said in an e-mail to IT Media’s The Register that if U.S. developers/developers work/operate in Europe, they need to follow the same rules.

GitHub believes that for software developers because applications often involve many different contributors and different layers of code (these codes may have different licenses), the problem of false positives or false negatives is particularly acute.

In addition, the code-sharing platform is required to remove the code without a license.

Julia Reda, a member of the European Parliament, described the other worrying provisions in the copyright proposal. They apply to programming platforms and other content sharing websites. These platforms and websites will be affected by the proposal:

• The platform needed to license all of the copyrighted content they hosted, which she thought was almost impossible, especially for code-sharing platforms.
• The platform needs to prevent copyrighted content from being uploaded, which she believes requires the use of content filters.
• Since the uploaded/blocked content is to be de-identified and the content filter cannot process any personal data, she states that it is therefore impossible to archive error correction for over-filtering.
• The scanned document will be checked against all uploaded content, and Rida believes that this violates the EU’s ban on general surveillance.
• Filtering does not apply to online markets (such as eBay), Internet service providers (ISPs), research repositories, or cloud storage services. Rida pointed out that these services are not exempt from licensing requirements and are prone to litigation due to confusing language.

The debate over copyright proposals has never stopped, so it is still too early to judge whether some of its broader, more demanding or inconsistent provisions will become law.

The reason for this reasonable proposal is to ensure that performers, creators, and publishers get paid for their works, but it may not be suitable for other communities. Whoever wants to express their opinions is welcome to contact members of the European Parliament, members of the council and members of the European Union to ensure their aspirations.

Source: theregister