Enjoy free links&ideas sharing, while you can

For those unlucky enough to live in EU

Enjoy free links&ideas sharing, while you can. The EU Parliament is hard at work to stop it. And they use football championships as a convenient smoke screen.

If it’s done, then adios funny memes, free of charge links sharing, or promoting a small business.
Personally, I don’t buy this “it’s just to weed out bad/dishonest guys” explanation. Any legal tool can and will be abused in the service of rich and influential /my opinion/.

See, who wants to vote “yes” and remember their names. These are the names of people who will destroy the internet as you know it.

So, here’s another useful link /while I can…/ : free sounds

BTW: I still wonder, if it’s the stupidity and inability to see consequences, or corruption in EU Parliament.

You can read the (relatively brief) proposal here - search page for “Article 13”.

@DrA - can you explain how this limits “free links & ideas sharing”? I don’t see that there.

What I do see there is a requirement for sites to use content filters to identify pirate uploads.

Depending on how the content agreements with copyright holders are implemented, this might limit the use of copyright material in memes etc, which is already illegal but rarely penalised.

There are legitimate concerns, of course. In practice, it’s likely to create barriers to entry for new site providers and independent artists / authors. There’s also no mention of due process.

Done well, it could simply be DCMI with automation… but then politicians don’t have the management skills to do things well, in most cases.


I am a citizen of the European Union, I have my own (tiny) company, I communicate with my clients via email and whatsapp and I also run a private website for gaming stuff: https://thestoryteller01.wordpress.com/

All that means, that I DO have a position on the matter and I am willing to discuss…but in my opinion neverwintervaul.org is not the place to belittle the residents of the European Union and attack their governing body.

If I want to read about the “unlucky people living in the EU/US/Russia/etc”, how “the governing bodies of the EU/US/Russia/etc are working hard to restrict internet freedom” or “the stupidity/corruption of the EU parliament/US Congress/Russian Assembly/etc” and people generally slander each others countries and governments… I go to the STEAM forums, thank you very much.

Next someone might want to start a Trump discussion so this kind of posting should be stopped in it’s tracks immediately.

1 Like

I find that to be just the opposite. I and anybody I have met tend to speak about our own Governments not others. I got the impression that DrA is of the EU. I have lived in the EU, SW Asia and the Far East Asia. I have heard very few speak of others governments mostly because they know very little about other governments. The old saying is familiarity breeds contempt not the other way around. Although I do agree that the last comment made by DrA, should not be here on the Vault, but that is for the Vault monitors speak to them about not you or I. Sorry guys if I over stepped my bounds.

1 Like

I don’t see anything in the site guidelines to prevent this discussion, as long as it’s respectful to other members and pertinant to what we do here.


Mmm. Mixed bag, isn’t it. On one hand, it’s in nobody’s interest to develop the kind of “hate on everything and everyone”-discussion culture here that’s prevalent in so many other places on and about the internet, and I know for sure that there are a good lot of people who’d prefer that controversial and “personal” themes like politics or religion not be discussed at all.

On the other, people should know that their ideas and concerns are valid and may be voiced and considered by all, and if we cut particular topics of discourse out, we leave one another stuck in our own heads by ourselves with the thoughts we’ve already got on those topics. Kinda like with the scripting/programming/crafting topics - sharing knowledge and insights leaves everyone who witnesses it a little bit better off for it. It gets us insights that we wouldn’t have come up with on our own, broadening everyone’s horizons. It’s really one of the biggest advantages of being part of a community of any type at all.

I’d generally like to vote for permitting controversial and personal topics, for the sake of everyone’s mental health maintenance and personal growth. Same as with when people squabble, actually - when people have shitty conflict resolution skills, we ought to try to teach them better ones, if we’re able (which helps us get better conflict resolution skills, too, to boot). It’s not something people are just born with; that particular skill needs practice, which requires opportunity to practice - which, yeah, means squabbling. It means people getting upset, and it means not punting eachother into corners for it, but helping one another back up and showing eachother that it’s fine to get mad sometimes (as a subset of “it’s fine to not be a robot; you’re still valued and welcome here even when you fuck up”). Really stable relationships aren’t ones where people never argue, they’re ones where people argue respectfully and constructively when they do, still showing appreciation and consideration for one another even when they passionately disagree.

On topic of Steam, I thought there was a noteworthy excerpt in that one recent statement on censorship/which games get into the store:

“In addition, Valve is not a small company - we’re not a homogeneous group. The online debates around these topics play out inside Valve as well. We don’t all agree on what deserves to be on the Store. So when we say there’s no way to avoid making a bunch of people mad when making decisions in this space, we’re including our own employees, their families and their communities in that.”

^- Political and personal differences of opinion and preference won’t go away and stop causing friction if we try to bury them, they’ll just resurface whenever decisions stand to be made. I think it’d be much less trouble in the long run if we stick to standards of respect and seeking mutual understanding and appreciation than if we try to suppress that stuff.

It’s just much more time-and-effort intensive on everyone’s parts, since it means taking the time to show respect and consideration for contrary ideas, and being courteous when people who don’t know how to do this stuff yet make “discussion culture missteps”. If there’s anyplace that can manage to pull that off, though, it’d have to be this one. We know how to do this already; we practice it each and every day in all the various crafting threads. It’s the exact same methodology, just applied to a different topic.

Stayin’ at least a little bit ontopic:

I don’t think you need to worry much about the continued availability of free resource sharing sites, DrA.

The EU has bigger concerns than deliberately going after screwing over the little guys economically and taking away people’s fun, like harrassing the noncommercial open-source folks. If there’s a secret shadowy intent for increasing means for internet censorship in there, it’s more likely to be about combating voter influence by politically hostile parties.

I’m fairly passionately pro-European, personally. But I agree that pretty much anything will be used and abused for the benefit of some unscrupulous person or other. :thinking: I think that’s actually the situation we’ve already got, as part of “how reality works (mechanically)”; people do what they want to do (or think should be done), providing they’re able to do it. So people with more ability to do things tend to wind up getting their interests realized more than people with less ability to do things, and people who are willing to do the kinds of things it takes to get the ability to do what they want done have a massive natural advantage over people who aren’t willing to do unscrupulous things to get themselves positioned to be able to do things.

Dunning-Kruger plays into that, too, big time. A lot of politicians aren’t evil so much as just… very convinced that they really understand the impact their decisions will have, maybe because they just don’t possess enough data to see the extents of their own blind spots. Party-versus-party systems have a bit of that “associate with like-minded people only, and consider people with different ideals enemies whose needs don’t matter”-thing going on again, don’t they.

I like to think that politics, correctly utilized, keep power-and-status-hungry people busy squabbling with one another so the rest of everybody else is free to do the important stuff.

Time to promote an adorable game with an adorable message:


@Proleric, granted - the topic being huge, I limited my description to bare minimum only one Article 13, in belief, that anybody interested will do more deep research on the whole Act. Sorry for being so brief and not at all precise. I’ll do my best to improve - I can see that my communication in English needs it.

So, here’s my explanation: there’s high probability, that so-called “link tax” will be implemented, or - "“ancillary copyrights”. As the result, search engine companies will be obliged to pay, if they use phrases longer then word or few. Already, in 2014, after first implementation of this law, Google accommodated it by restricting visibility of search results. The second implementation in Spain, brought the closure of Spanish Google News.
See, it already worsened the availability of some news, information - that’s why I think my concern is valid.

Now, to the second issue - the content filters . If you have previous experience with this - you’ll probably know it’s far from perfect. let’s say, that you’ve made the video from your sister wedding and put it on youtube. Unfortunately, there was this fragment of some copyrighted song at the background - and family dancing to it. And for sure, the video was removed, author suffered the consequences. She never shared anything again.
For now, most of the platforms use “notice and takedown” - only, if the infringement of some copyrighted content is reported. After the proposed change, they will be directly responsible for the content. I think that the admins will rather block or remove content “just in case” to avoid the lawsuit - then bother to check every item.
Well, this does not exhaust the issues, but my post is already very long.

1 Like

Being UE citizen myself, I have no intent to belittle the residents of UE - and I don’t think that calling anyone “unlucky enough” is offensive - for me, it’s just expressing concern and care.
Why bring the discussion here ? Because I think that the results may have impact on this site, and the internet as a whole. When something (news, information, content) starts being restricted - it DOES have impact, even indirect. And criticizing and giving opinion is not equal to “attacking governing body” - but that’s my opinion, shaped by apparently totally different life experience.

1 Like

Time to promote an adorable game with an adorable message:

It IS an adorable game, unfortunately it hung itself up during the first “darwin” round (eliminate bottom 5) and I didn’t want to repeat the first 12 minutes to get there ^^

Forgive me for being generally sceptical about peoples intentions based on origin but as a EU member you certainly know about Brexit and the Eurosceptics. We have EU parliament members, regional political parties and whole countries within the EU who think they’d be better off without it. Brexit has proven, that being an EU citizen doesn’t mean one isn’t able to battle it with every means imaginable.
(Having said that, I do not blindly agree with the governing bodies of the EU - I still battle CETA and will battle TTIP if it makes a comeback).

Discussing and critizing laws/regulations/policies is good and necessary, no doubt that people generally care too less about decisions made by those they voted into office.

But based on lifelong experience I have learned to be very sceptical when people start discussions (online or in RL) with this pattern:

  • being sympathetic with an assumingly large group or percentage who will be affected by the law/regulation/policy, declaring them “victims/casualties/sufferers”
  • painting end-of-days scenarios
  • attacking those who are responsible for the law/regulation/policy, questioning their competence, motives and integrity
  • while not talking much about the actual wording or content of the law/regulation/policy

With that I will conclude and leave this discussion be.

1 Like

To stay on topic, I think we need to focus specifically on whether there is an internet regulation issue here that affects how we operate in this hobby.

peeks into thread - Hey what are you all talk-



1 Like

Good point, @Proleric, people usually prefer to see, how something impacts them.
I’ll be first to admit, that I’m not a lawyer, so I might get some things wrong.
Frankly, I don’t know if this site will have to accommodate to UE law. But if this is the case then direct impact could be - for admins - obligations to check each and every comment, submission, etc. to make sure that no rights were violated, and they will be hold responsible if something like that happens. Even more, longer citations could be seen as a copyright infringement under these new laws.
For content and module creators - your work will be checked and decided as original by some algorithms, and as you know, they are far from perfect (example - a few days ago whole MIT university content on youtube was blocked due to false Content Id alarm - and it will get worse, if this new law rules are implemented),

Indirect impact - limited resources and information - due to “link tax”, smaller sites can be excluded from search results, also, promotion of this site might suffer (less links to this site= worse SEO results)

Let me clarify - I’m not an expert, and I can be blowing this out of proportion - but after reading stuff like this:https://www.change.org/p/european-parliament-stop-the-censorship-machinery-save-the-internet I’ve got seriously worried.

I’m all for protecting any author’s work from stealing, but "ancillary copyrights” the worst solution possible - it’s already failed twice (Germany and Spain).

Well, only the time will show… Let’s hope for the best, because I value creative opportunities here, Neverwintervault.org

Maybe I’m being naive, but in this particular case I’d assess the risk as low.

Article 13 requires the measures to be “proportionate” and places a heavy burden on those copyright holders who want to engage. On both counts, my guess is that this site would fly below the radar - it’s more likely to apply to big companies on both sides - but of course I could be wrong. No harm in lobbying, I suppose.


Talking about the indirect impact -
Blender users/CC creators, you might want to check this :youtube already blocks some channels - in advance of new EU copyright


^- Adding a couple links to the mix that seem to explain some of the business pro-and-con forces fighting in the background on this one.

This looks like a move against the “Platforms cannot reasonably be expected to be responsible for manually examining and approving each and every upload, that’s insane”-argumentation that’s currently enabling “See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil”-toleration of questionable uploads of all kinds - “OK, well then, automatize it so you don’t have to check everything manually!”. It’d strike a heavy blow at the “Don’t ask, don’t tell”-mode of operations. A very “Lawful” move, overall.

I’ve got a string of questions on how this would be meant to work in practice, though. My Legalese is not good enough to read the answers out of this thing.

How would this interact with trademark laws? Would failure to register trademarked content into filters count as lack of action to protect the trademark? That’d have to affect all kinds of intellectual property. Game franchises, characters, settings… if they’d all have to be registered for automatic takedown to keep the trademark intact, then yeah, that would be a huge mess for modding, fanart, and fanfiction platforms.

Would each site need to maintain their own filter database or would it be handled collectively, and in the former case, would it be possible to sue a hosting platform for damages without the rightholder or a legal representative of the rightholder first needing to notify them of particular content that should be added to that site’s filters, or, in the latter case, would it be possible to sue site hosts for damages if they’re found hosting copyrighted content without having filters installed? German laws at least aren’t always friendly and harmless for website hosts, even noncommercial ones. If there’s money to be made in checking whether noncommercial hosting platforms have filters installed, you can bet that the Vault would qualify as a target, too, if ever spotted.

I suppose we’ll have to see how this works out in practice - if it passes. I think I’d tentatively prefer it not to. The idea of automatizing takedowns to some degree isn’t bad in principle, but this writ seems like it has a rather lot of holes in it.

If there are known hostiles that’ve got it out for a platform, it’d be wise to shut things down (like YouTube is doing with some channels, yeah) preemptively just to be on the safe side. They’ve got a shitton of people standing ready to use any new opportunity to bleed them.

If a good lot of the anti-Europe folks are voting in favor of this in it’s current form, they might just be out for the “OMG, the evil EU is passing crazy laws to hurt the little people!”-outrage, and wouldn’t oppose sanity-based alterations to this thing in the next round (since at that point, it’d be “See! If The People push back against the evil EU, it will bend! Push back harder! Push back harder!!”). So if this law-change passes and causes widespread trouble for people like us in their hobbies, and for noncommercials and open-source folks in general, then it mightn’t stay in place in this form for very long.

:expressionless: ::mumbling something decidedly partisan::

No use in panicking over it, though. Worse (not worst) case scenario for the Vault, the site needs to be taken down for a few weeks to be checked over and have filters or something installed to protect the platform, and any such filters would be annoying everyone here thereafter. We’ll see. Contacting one’s MEPs and raising a huge fuss online voicing opinions for or against this thing if strongly opposed to either outcome (it passing, it not passing), is absolutely an option.

Super inconvenient, though, yeah. GitHub’s spooked, too. :-/