Today in Strasbourg, the European Parliament voted 348-274 (with 36 abstentions) to approve the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. It retains Article 13, the harmful provision that will require nearly all for-profit web platforms to get a license for every user upload or otherwise install content filters and censor content, lest they be held liable for infringement. Article 11 also passed, which  would force news aggregators to pay publishers for linking to their stories.

There was a potential opportunity to vote on amendments that would have removed the most problematic provisions in the draft directive, particularly Articles 13 and 11, but the preliminary vote even to consider amendments fell short by five votes, thus pushing the Parliament to move ahead and simply approve the entire package.

MEP Julia Reda called the decision “a dark day for internet freedom.” We agree. There was a massive outpouring of protest against the dangers of Article 13 to competition, creativity, and freedom of expression. This included 5+ million petition signatures, a gigantic action of emails and calls to MEPs, 170,000 people demonstrating in the in the streets, large websites and communities going dark, warnings from academics, consumer groups, startups and businesses, internet luminaries, and the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression. Even so, it was not enough to convince the European legislator to change course on this complex and damaging provision that will turn the web upside down.    

Creative Commons CEO Ryan Merkley responded to the vote:

Despite an incredible show of public opposition to the directive, and an abundance of evidence that the proposals will favour large rights holders, damage online communities, slow or even stop innovation, and entrench established big tech players, the European legislature has decided to approve it. Regardless of this outcome, we’ll continue to work with Member States wherever we can to ensure the implementations of this directive minimize the negative impact we anticipate for the commons, and on users who want to share creativity and knowledge online.

We’re disappointed with the decision to push through Article 13 and 11, but the directive is not a total wash. There are some productive changes that will improve the situation of the commons, libraries & cultural heritage, and research sectors. For example, the directive includes a provision to ensure that digital reproductions of public domain works don’t get a separate copyright and will also be in the public domain. It includes text to improve the ability for cultural heritage institutions to preserve works and to make available copyrighted works from their collections that are no longer commercially available. And the directive slightly improves the copyright exception on text and data mining (TDM) by making mandatory an earlier optional provision that would expand the possibilities for those wishing to conduct TDM.

The final outcome of the European copyright directive reflects a disturbing path toward increasing control of the web to benefit only powerful rights holders at the expense of the rights of users and the public interest. It has been — and will continue to be — up to us all to fight for an open internet that sustains new creativity and upholds freedom of expression in the digital environment.

The post A Dark Day for the Web: EU Parliament Approves Damaging Copyright Rules appeared first on Creative Commons.

Llegó el momento decisivo para el proyecto de directiva sobre derechos de autor en el mercado único digital de la Unión Europea. Las dramáticas consecuencias negativas que traerían los filtros de carga de contenidos serían desastrosas para la visión que Creative Commons tiene como organización y comunidad global. La inclusión del Artículo 13 hace que la directiva sea imposible de apoyar tal como está.

El mes pasado, el Parlamento, el Consejo y la Comisión europeos completaron sus negociaciones y llegaron a un acuerdo final sobre el texto de la directiva de derechos de autor. Poco después, los embajadores de los Estados miembros de la UE y la comisión de asuntos jurídicos del Parlamento le dieron luz verde, lo que ahora lleva a una votación final en la sesión plenaria del Parlamento programada para el 26 de marzo.

La semana próxima, los 751 eurodiputados votarán entre adoptar la directiva de derechos de autor o descartarla para volver a empezar de cero.

Los filtros de contenidos modificarán la forma en que funciona la web

Desde una perspectiva de derechos de autor, el Artículo 13 da vuelta el modo en que funciona la web. Obligará a casi todas las plataformas web con fines de lucro que permiten la carga de contenidos generados por los usuarios a que obtengan una licencia para todas las cargas de los usuarios o instalen filtros de derechos de autor y censuren contenidos. Si las plataformas no cumplen, podrían ser legalmente responsables ante demandas por perjuicios masivos por infracción de derechos de autor. El resultado lógico es que esto dañará las plataformas existentes y evitará la creación y el florecimiento de servicios nuevos e innovadores en Europa porque esos nuevos actores no tienen el dinero, la capacidad ni la experiencia para llevar a cabo acuerdos de licenciamiento, o para construir (o contratar) las tecnologías de filtrado necesarias. Por el contrario, las corporaciones ya establecidas se consolidarán aún más y se volverán más dominantes, ya que los servicios como YouTube tienen una ventaja en ambos frentes. No podemos respaldar un ecosistema de derechos de autor que afianzará el amplio poder de mercado de los actores tradicionales y que, al mismo tiempo, creará obstáculos innecesarios para nuevas plataformas y servicios que estimulen la creatividad y el intercambio.

Esta inversión del régimen de responsabilidad, que en los hechos obliga a que sean implementados filtros de contenidos, tiene otra consecuencia desconcertante: los derechos de los usuarios son echados por tierra, porque las tecnologías de filtrado no pueden distinguir cuándo una obra se está subiendo de manera ilícita y cuándo se está utilizando legalmente bajo una excepción a los derechos de autor. Un sistema de este tipo casi seguramente restringirá la libertad de expresión, ya que las plataformas evitarán cualquier riesgo bloqueando el contenido, independientemente de si el uso está protegido por excepciones a los derechos de autor, como por ejemplo las excepciones que habilitan la crítica, la cita y la parodia.

El camino hasta aquí

En los últimos años, Creative Commons ha estado trabajando para respaldar cambios a los derechos de autor en Europa, con el objetivo de favorecer los bienes comunes y el interés público. Hemos hecho esto como parte de la Asociación Communia, en conjunto con organizaciones de la sociedad civil, grupos de investigación, activistas por los derechos de los usuarios y defensores de la web abierta. CC envió comentarios a la consulta inicial de la Comisión Europea, realizó un documento conjunto de análisis y recomendaciones elaborado por nuestra red en Europa, abogó por proteger la investigación científica y brindó recomendaciones de votación sobre muchas disposiciones de la directiva de derechos de autor.

Communia y otras organizaciones no gubernamentales europeas han apoyado cambios positivos en aspectos clave de la reforma que beneficiarían la investigación, la educación y el bien público. En particular, han trabajado para mejorar las excepciones para la minería de datos y de textos, así como las excepciones para la educación, y han propuesto cambios para apoyar el dominio público y para mejorar la capacidad de las instituciones que preservan el patrimonio cultural para poner a disposición los contenidos en línea. Son dignos de celebración los esfuerzos incansables de las organizaciones e individuos que han tomado la iniciativa para defender los bienes comunes y para mejorar varias partes de la directiva con el objetivo de respaldar los derechos de los usuarios. Su investigación detallada, sus aportes de redacción y su activismo han contribuido en gran medida para mejorar muchas partes poco conocidas pero enormemente importantes de la directiva.

Qué puedes hacer ahora

En CC creemos que nuestra visión de acceso universal a la investigación y a la educación, así como de plena participación en la cultura, solo se logrará cuando tengamos políticas de derechos de autor que realmente promuevan la creatividad y protejan los derechos de los usuarios en la era digital. Con el Artículo 13, no es exagerado decir que ocurrirá un cambio fundamental en la forma en que las personas pueden usar Internet y compartir contenidos en línea. A pesar de las pequeñas mejoras en otros aspectos del paquete de reforma de los derechos de autor, en el balance general una directiva que contiene el Artículo 13 hará más daño que beneficio.

Si estás en Europa, ve a https://saveyourinternet.eu/act/ para informarles a tus diputados del Parlamento Europeo que no apoyas una reforma de los derechos de autor que afecta la forma en que creamos y compartimos cultura en la web. Si el Artículo 13 no se puede eliminar, los legisladores deberían rechazar la reforma completa y comenzar de nuevo.

The post Los europeos deberían decirle al Parlamento que vote NO a los filtros de derechos de autor appeared first on Creative Commons.

It’s the end of the line for the EU’s proposed Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. The dramatic negative effects of upload filters would be disastrous to the vision Creative Commons cares about as an organisation and global community. The continued inclusion of Article 13 makes the directive impossible to support as-is.

Last month the Parliament, Council, and Commission completed their trilogue negotiations and reached a final compromise on the copyright directive text. Soon thereafter the EU Member State Ambassadors and the Parliament’s legal affairs committee gave a green light, now leading to a final vote in the plenary session of the Parliament scheduled for March 26.

Next week all 751 MEPs will get a chance vote on whether to adopt the copyright directive, or send it back to the drawing board.

Upload filters will turn the web upside down

From a copyright perspective, Article 13 turns how the web works on its head. It will require nearly all for-profit web platforms that permit user generated content uploads to either get a license for all user uploads or otherwise install copyright filters and censor content. If the platforms don’t comply, they could become liable for massive copyright infringement damages. The logical outcome is that this will harm existing platforms and prevent the creation and flourishing of new and innovative services in Europe because those new players don’t have the money, pull, or expertise to conclude licensing deals or build (or pay for) the necessary filtering technologies. Instead, the established companies will simply become more entrenched and dominant, as services like YouTube have a headstart on both of these fronts. We cannot support a copyright ecosystem that will simply entrench the extensive market power of incumbent players and, at the same time, create unnecessary roadblocks for new platforms and services that stimulate creativity and sharing.

This reversal of the liability regime that all but ensures upload filters will need to be implemented has another disconcerting consequence: user rights are thrown out the window because filtering technologies can’t possibly know when a work is infringing and when a work is being legally used under an exception to copyright. Such a system will almost surely curtail freedom of expression, as platforms will mitigate any risk by simply blocking content regardless of whether the use is sanctioned under the exceptions to copyright, such as for criticism, quotation, and parody.

The road to here

Over the last several years, Creative Commons has been working to support copyright changes in Europe that champion the commons and the public interest. We’ve done this as part of the Communia Association, civil society organisations, research groups, user rights activists, and open web advocates. CC submitted comments to the initial consultation from the Commission, made a joint analysis and suggestions for improvement with our network in Europe, advocated to protect scientific research, and offered voting recommendations on many provisions within the sweeping copyright directive.

Communia and other NGOs on the ground in Europe have supported positive changes to key aspects of the reform that would benefit research, education, and the public good, particularly working to improve the exceptions for text and data mining and education, as well changes to support the public domain and improve the ability of cultural heritage institutions to make content available online. The tireless efforts of organisations and individuals who stepped up to defend the commons and improve various parts of the directive that supports robust user rights should be celebrated. Their detailed research, writing, and advocacy has done so much to improve many parts not-so-well covered yet incredibly important pieces of the directive.

What you can do now

CC believes that our vision of universal access to research and education and full participation in culture will only be achieved when we all have copyright policies that truly promote creativity and protect users rights in the digital age. With Article 13, it’s no exaggeration to say that it’ll fundamentally change the way people are able to use the internet and share online. Even with some of the minor improvements to other aspects of the copyright reform package, on balance a directive that contains Article 13 will do more harm than good.

If you’re in Europe go to https://saveyourinternet.eu/act/ to tell your MEPs you don’t support a copyright reform that turns how we create and share on the web upside down. If Article 13 can’t be removed, then policymakers should reject the reform outright and begin again.

The post Europeans should tell Parliament to vote NO to copyright filters appeared first on Creative Commons.

At A Grand Re-Opening of the Public Domain at the Internet Archive, I teased a new product vision for CC Search that gets more specific than our ultimate goal of providing access to all 1.4 billion CC licensed and public domain works on the web. I’m pleased to present that refined vision, which is focused on building a product that promotes not just discovery, but reuse of openly-licensed and public domain works. We want your feedback in making it a reality. What kinds of images do you most need and desire to reuse when creating your own works? Along that vein, what organizational collections would you like to see us prioritizing for inclusion? Where can we make the biggest difference for you and your fellow creators?

Vision

Our 2019 vision is:

“CC Search is a leading tool for creators looking to discover and reuse free resources with greater ease and confidence.”

The vision centers on reuse — CC will prioritize and build for users who seek to not only discover free resources in the commons, but who seek to reuse these resources with greater ease and confidence, and for whom in particular the rights status of these works may be important. This approach means that CC will shift from its “quantity first” approach (front door to 1.4 billion works) to prioritizing content that is more relevant and engaging to creators.

We made our assumptions based on a combination of user research, whatever quantitative data we could get our hands on (e.g. analytics on previous iterations of search), and pure conjecture (based on anecdotal evidence from our community), or what in the lean start-up world is called a leap of faith.

How we expect reuse to happen

The base catalog is the database of all CC works we are continuing to gather and grow. We envision users will be able to access this catalog in three ways:

1. Through CC Search — the default front end you see now.
2. Through some curation on CC Search — you could imagine different portals for different kinds of users, e.g. educators seeking open textbooks.
3. Through CC Search being integrated directly into other sites and software via a CC API, e.g. CC Search in Google Docs.

Once the user accesses the work, the user takes the next step to reuse the work. They download it, which means they make a copy. The user who is also a creator takes a step further; they attribute the author of the work in their new creation, ideally through the automatic and easy ways we provide for them to do this. Both download and attribution are ways a user reuses the work in a way that implicates copyright and thereby the Creative Commons license. And both are potential ways we can learn how that work is used in the wild.

Through learning about how CC works are reused, we will be able to validate our hypotheses and know we are on the right track (or not). We will also be better able to tell the story or journey of the works’ impact, which speaks to a key insight from our user research:

“People like seeing how their work is used, where it goes, and who it touches, but have no easy way to find this out.”

This learning is the hard part of our work, and what we still need to figure out. How do we track and learn about reuse in a way that is effective, but also aligns with our values and respects user privacy?

User research & usability testing

In 2019, we will focus on images and texts, with a stretch goal of including audio files. Accordingly, we will focus any user research and usability testing on groups of people that reuse these works in a meaningful way, specifically, “Creators making new works using existing free content.” A few we will start with are:

• Creators making designs, imagery and art works (commercial or independent)
• Creators illustrating a text or text-based resource (blog, journalistic articles, educational/academic texts or presentations)
• Creators making a video

We’ll also being doing some separate user research to add open texts, which is a different bucket of people than the creators above, because we think (but don’t know) that most people seeking open texts are really seeking access, and not reuse, when it comes to CC Search. For example, we think that community college faculty looking for open textbooks are mainly seeking to access all open textbooks in one place.

As we talk to users, collect user feedback, and conduct usability testing, we may learn differently.

Roadmap

Based on this new 2019 vision and strategy, here are some of our key deliverables for the year.

The complete roadmap is available here, which also includes a pipeline of ideas. The pipeline of ideas is the master list of ideas from the community that we will revisit at the end of each quarter to decide what makes it in the roadmap. The roadmap is an evolving document and we welcome your comments and feedback.

The Team

The current CC Search team is led by CC’s Director of Engineering, Kriti Godey, and myself, CC’s Director of Product and Research. The other members are Sophine Clachar (Data Engineer), Alden Page (Back End Engineer), Breno Ferreira (Front End Engineer) and Sarah Pearson (Product Counsel).

Get involved

We are growing a vibrant community of open source developers and users willing to test and provide feedback on CC Search.

If you’re a current or potential user of CC Search, join the #cc-usability channel at the Creative Commons Slack (https://slack-signup.creativecommons.org) where we regularly engage the group for feedback on new features.

If you’re a developer, check out Creative Commons Open Source, a hub for the CC developer community and the #cc-developers channel at the Creative Commons Slack.

The post CC Search: A New Vision, Strategy & Roadmap for 2019 appeared first on Creative Commons.

Yesterday, NBC News published a story about IBM’s work on improving diversity in facial recognition technology and the dataset that they gathered to further this work. The dataset includes links to one million photos from Flickr, many or all of which were apparently shared under a Creative Commons license. Some Flickr users were dismayed to learn that IBM had used their photos to train the AI, and had questions about the ethics, privacy implications, and fair use of such a dataset being used for algorithmic training. We are reaching out to IBM to understand their use of the images, and to share the concerns of our community.

CC is dedicated to facilitating greater openness for the common good. In general, we believe that the use of publicly available data on the Internet has led to greater innovation, collaboration, and creativity. But there are also real concerns that data can be used for negative activities or negative outcomes.

While we do not have all the facts regarding the IBM dataset, we are aware that fair use allows all types of content to be used freely, and that all types of content are collected and used every day to train and develop AI. CC licenses were designed to address a specific constraint, which they do very well: unlocking restrictive copyright. But copyright is not a good tool to protect individual privacy, to address research ethics in AI development, or to regulate the use of surveillance tools employed online. Those issues rightly belong in the public policy space, and good solutions will consider both the law and the community norms of CC licenses and content shared online in general.

I hope we will use this moment to build on the important principles and values of sharing, and engage in discussion with those using our content in objectionable ways, and to speak out on and help shape positive outcomes on the important issues of privacy, surveillance, and AI that impact the sharing of works on the web.

We are taking this opportunity to speak to this particular type of reuse – improving artificial intelligence tools designed for facial recognition through the reuse of content found on the web (not just CC-licensed content) – to help clarify how the licenses work in this context. We have published new FAQs here that we will continue to update.

If you have comments or questions, please write CC at info@creativecommons.org. We will also be creating other opportunities to engage in public discussion in the coming weeks and months. We look forward to joining these discussions as we look for ways to resolve ethical public policy issues around data, AI, and machine learning as a community.

The post Use and Fair Use: Statement on shared images in facial recognition AI appeared first on Creative Commons.