Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
EU

EU Tells Internet Archive That Much Of Its Site Is 'Terrorist Content' (techdirt.com) 199

Mike Masnick, reporting for TechDirt: We've been trying to explain for the past few months just how absolutely insane the new EU Terrorist Content Regulation will be for the internet. Among many other bad provisions, the big one is that it would require content removal within one hour as long as any "competent authority" within the EU sends a notice of content being designated as "terrorist" content. The law is set for a vote in the EU Parliament just next week. And as if they were attempting to show just how absolutely insane the law would be for the internet, multiple European agencies (we can debate if they're "competent") decided to send over 500 totally bogus takedown demands to the Internet Archive last week, claiming it was hosting terrorist propaganda content. [...] And just in case you think that maybe the requests are somehow legit, they are so obviously bogus that anyone with a browser would know they are bogus. Included in the list of takedown demands are a bunch of the Archive's "collection pages" including the entire Project Gutenberg page of public domain texts, it's collection of over 15 million freely downloadable texts, the famed Prelinger Archive of public domain films and the Archive's massive Grateful Dead collection. Oh yeah, also a page of CSPAN recordings. So much terrorist content!
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EU Tells Internet Archive That Much Of Its Site Is 'Terrorist Content'

Comments Filter:
  • by sconeu ( 64226 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @04:44PM (#58423910) Homepage Journal

    To the publishing companies, ANYTHING freely available is terroristic content.

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • by Megol ( 3135005 )

        And this is upvoted... Is there any hope for humanity when something failing so thoroughly in everything is seen as truth when truth is now so easy to find?

        We need a new internet where every user have to prove they are capable of logical and critical thinking before being granted access.

    • by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @05:26PM (#58424144)

      His invention decimated the livelihoods of THOUSANDS of monks!

    • by UnknownSoldier ( 67820 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @06:04PM (#58424304)

      That's why the publishing companies invented Copyright [wikipedia.org] -- to stop other publishers!

      The first copyright privilege in England bears date 1518 and was issued to Richard Pynson, King's Printer, the successor to William Caxton. The privilege gives a monopoly for the term of two years. The date is 15 years later than that of the first privilege issued in France. Early copyright privileges were called "monopolies," particularly during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, who frequently gave grants of monopolies in articles of common use, such as salt, leather, coal, soap, cards, beer, and wine. The practice was continued until the Statute of Monopolies was enacted in 1623, ending most monopolies, with certain exceptions, such as patents; after 1623, grants of Letters patent to publishers became common.

      As the "menace" of printing spread, governments established centralized control mechanisms, and in 1557 the English Crown thought to stem the flow of seditious and heretical books by chartering the Stationers' Company. The right to print was limited to the members of that guild, and thirty years later the Star Chamber was chartered to curtail the "greate enormities and abuses" of "dyvers contentyous and disorderlye persons professinge the arte or mystere of pryntinge or selling of books." The right to print was restricted to two universities and to the 21 existing printers in the city of London, which had 53 printing presses. The French crown also repressed printing, and printer Etienne Dolet was burned at the stake in 1546. As the English took control of type founding in 1637, printers fled to the Netherlands. Confrontation with authority made printers radical and rebellious, and 800 authors, printers and book dealers were incarcerated in the Bastille before it was stormed in 1789. The notion that the expression of dissent or subversive views should be tolerated, not censured or punished by law, developed alongside the rise of printing and the press. The Areopagitica, published in 1644 under the full title Areopagitica: A speech of Mr. John Milton for the liberty of unlicensed printing to the Parliament of England, was John Milton's response to the English parliament re-introducing government licensing of printers, hence publishers. In doing so Milton articulated the main strands of future discussions about freedom of expression. By defining the scope of freedom of expression and of "harmful" speech Milton argued against the principle of pre-censorship and in favour of tolerance for a wide range of views.

      • by dryeo ( 100693 )

        Things did change in England after the Glorious Revolution with Parliament refusing to continue the Stationers monopoly and introducing the modern type of copyright where after 14-28 years (35 years grandfathers clause) works entered the public domain as well as copies going to famous libraries (Oxford and Cambridge).

  • Let them deal with the headache of sorting this sh-t out.

    EU, California, all these other commie hellholes that want to regulate an international network can go f themselves.

    If I decide to host the Project Gutenberg page of public domain texts on my machine in Florida, who the hell is the EU to tell me I must take it down?

  • Embarrass the EU (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @04:48PM (#58423936) Journal

    Just put a message for EU ip addresses that reads something like:

    "Due to EU Committee X takedown notice 123456 claiming this site had "terrorist content", we have blocked this content for EU readers. Our internal review of the site found it did NOT qualify for a take-down, but to avoid legal hassles, we decided to block it for now. You can donate to our legal defense fund at [url here]. We apologize for the inconvenience."

    Further, publish a list on the Internet Archive site of all take-down requests, including a note marking the dubious requests. The Streisand Effect will then kick in and the EU review committee will end up embarrassed as those who can read the blocked content overseas can know about their poor decision.

    • Re:Embarrass the EU (Score:5, Informative)

      by sconeu ( 64226 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @04:51PM (#58423966) Homepage Journal

      They're bureaucrats. They have no sense of shame, and therefore can not be embarrassed.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        A bureaucrat that does not create busy work has no job. In order to justify their existence, they must keep regulating. Even if the reason for their position to exist has been fulfilled. You can't possibly say job done, move on to something else. You just keep tightening the ropes tighter and tighter beyond practical reason, because that's how your job is defined.

        • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          AOC, Bernie Sanders, and all the Dems want to bring a Eurostyle vision of big brotherism to the USA. Censorshop, take down notices, high taxes, gun confiscation, Muslim overlords, and terrorism, are all headed your way thanks to the Democrat Party.

        • by Megol ( 3135005 )

          A bureaucrat is someone implementing something the decision makers ordered them to - if you want to complain direct that towards the decision makers. What you are describing is something illegal as a bureaucrat isn't allowed to make law, just regulations how to implement the laws they are given to enforce.

    • the EU review committee will end up embarrassed

      Bureaucrats will always seek to maintain the problem their bureaucracy was intended to solve.

  • by 3seas ( 184403 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @04:51PM (#58423964) Homepage Journal

    A few people, some very small fraction of something far less than 1% of a population of 7.5+ billion people are going to decide something that affects/constrains the populations access to a massive amount of information.

    Where/When have we seen this sort of act before in our human history? i.e. Library of Alexandria

    • That's exactly it, so why play ball?

      Oh, you don't want your section of population accessing our content, then they're not allowed. Why bend to every whim that some grey haired politician comes up with? Let them deal with the outrage when the people can't access X or Y

    • by sheramil ( 921315 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @04:58PM (#58424018)

      Where/When have we seen this sort of act before in our human history? i.e. Library of Alexandria

      That's one hell of a take-down notice. Don't give them any ideas.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      Where/When have we seen this sort of act before in our human history? i.e. Library of Alexandria

      But you REMEMBER him, that was his entire point. Otherwise he'd just be a nameless face in the crowd.

      • by Livius ( 318358 )

        But you REMEMBER him, that was his entire point.

        I honestly have no idea who you mean. Historians certainly have no consensus as to who was most responsible for the library's destruction, or even in which century the worst things happened. Or did you mean the founder, who was proabably one of the Ptolemies?

  • What with the apparently relentless rise of right-wing parties across Europe, it's inevitable that a right-leaning prankster with "authority" as defined by the European Parliament decides to send out mass demands for removal of far-leftist content on the grounds that it inherently promotes terrorism. The resultant political hullabaloo will drive up popcorn sales and produce millions of liters of hot air, but I'm not sure whether European national agencies or lawmakers would learn anything about the law of u

    • a right-leaning prankster with "authority" as defined by the European Parliament decides to send out mass demands for removal of far-leftist content

      While I might agree that C-SPAN leans left, I'm fascinated to hear that you think the entire Gutenberg collection is "far-leftist content".

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @04:56PM (#58423998)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • The emails sender was spoofed.

      So this is lies just like all the other leaver arguments, millions of turks flooding the UK - lie, hundreds of new trade deals - lie, £350 million per week extra for the NHS - lie, bent bananas, etc. all lies.

    • The only valid reason for the UK to leave the EU is to stop blocking sensible directives, like this one:

      https://www.independent.co.uk/... [independent.co.uk]

      The UK is a crappy EU member and de Gaulle was right to veto the British membership back in the day.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by Jahta ( 1141213 )

      Ironically, today the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act [theregister.co.uk] came into force in the UK. Among other things, it makes viewing online "terrorist content" - even once - a criminal offence.

  • by Thelasko ( 1196535 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @05:00PM (#58424022) Journal
    Dear Government Authority,

    We have reviewed your request regarding the alleged "terrorist" content on our website, and found the request to be baseless and nonsensical. As a result, your agency has been placed on our "incompetent authority" list. All future requests from your organization will be ignored.

    If you believe your organization has been placed on the "incompetent authority" list in error, please send a certified letter stating your petition along with a 125 Euro processing fee to our legal department.

    Good Day,
    The Internet Archive
    • by Areyoukiddingme ( 1289470 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @05:12PM (#58424082)

      We have reviewed your request regarding the alleged "terrorist" content on our website, and found the request to be baseless and nonsensical. As a result, your agency has been placed on our "incompetent authority" list. All future requests from your organization will be ignored.

      That appears to be exactly the intent. Someone is trying to poison the well. Considering the 'Terrorist Content Regulation' doesn't exist yet, any demand to take something down by its authority is bogus regardless of the targeted content. This was not an accident, and the Internet Archive was selected specifically because it is known that they resist demand letters reflexively.

      It won't change anything though. Big content owners have money and money buys politicians. End of story.

      • The Internet Archive should be expected to have the technical competence to detect emails spoofing before publishing what amounts to fake news.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        I'm starting to think it was a case of hacking. Although the email apparently came from an official address, the agency it claims to be from doesn't actually exist. There is no institute with that name.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by aepervius ( 535155 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @05:03PM (#58424034)
    Firstly it was corrected to not say "EU" but "French national Internet Referral Unit" for which I can find no reference beside that article. There IS an EU IRU, but no french national IRU I can find of. So baring a proper reporting I am viewing that as dubious.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      That's because "Internet Referral Unit" is a functional description used by Europol (I assume), not the name of the agency.
      The articles do report the name of the agency, it's the OCLCTIC.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    It's time to go full P2P over TOR for everything. The Web is dead.

  • ... it wasn't "as if they were attempting to show just how absolutely insane the law would be for the internet," but rather an actual attempt by persons within these multiple European agencies to demonstrate the implications of this law. If so, it seems to have had the desired effect or drawing attention to the matter.

  • GeoBlock the EU (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Midnight Thunder ( 17205 ) on Thursday April 11, 2019 @05:31PM (#58424162) Homepage Journal

    Maybe content hosts should simply geoblock the whole the EU with a message of explaining the outcome of this?

  • Total nest of terrorists in those recordings

  • Look like youâ(TM)re incompetent and go after harmless content, so you have plausible deniability for when you take down speech that is incongruent with political ideology.
  • UK needs to RUN, not walk of the fascist EU.

/earth: file system full.

Working...