EU Article 13 digital copyright directive is looming, and it has big implications for creators

Article 13 has not yet broken into the mainstream business news agenda, but it has widespread implications for both content creators operating at scale and for smaller content creators (like myself) uploading content into any platform (including the big ones, You Tube, Reddit and Vimeo).

In a nutshell, Article 13 throws the onus of pro-active copyright management squarely onto the platforms publishing user generated content, and in pragmatic terms, necessitates the use of copyright filters & platforms to flag up and block all content (not just video, but photography and other creative) where there is no clear proven copyright ownership. Any publisher running fowl of this directive runs the risk of financial liability.

Put simply, this is going to catch a vast amount of content, and either result in creative being temporarily blocked while rights are proven, or in many more instances than currently, permanently blocked.

You Tube already has a content filtering platform, and one that is probably in the minds of the EU legislators drawing up Article 13. Content ID identifies rights holders to uploaded content (in particular music) and thereby enables payments of shared ad revenue back to the rights holders. But it's not perfect, and relies on the copyright owners proactively managing and calling out their copyrighted content. Furthermore, the sheer scale of content means that even automated or semi automated platforms like Content ID, struggle to keep pace with the level of uploads. Universal Music have have stated that Content ID fails to catch up to 40% of their uploaded material (see this Verge article, including some counter statistics from Google)

For smaller content creators, the implications for Article 13 are more far reaching.

Currently, many creators upload content that has copyrighted material that they do not have permission to use. In most cases, You Tube and Content ID allows this content still to be published, but with a flag indicated to the uploader that their content includes copyrighted content, but that the copyright holder is allowing usage. The uploader can then either accept that there will be ads on their video, with the implication being that a share of ad revenue will go back to the copyright holder.

The You Tube uploader also has the option to file a copyright dispute, and cite their reasons (for example owning a licence to use the music). But this process can be slow, and relies on the rights holders being sufficiently motivated (which may not be the case with low volume creators) to review copyright claims and approve them. It also relies, as in the case of Universal Music and others, for all content rights to be flagged up to You Tube in the first place.

So if both small and large content creators have issues with existing filter platforms such as Content ID, a platform which Google has already invested $60m USD in, imagine the fall out from the EU requirement that ALL content publishers have to comply with Article 13.

For a start, publishers will err on the side of caution.

Copyright is a murky business, look at all the lawsuits that pop up around music (the Blurred Lines and Marvin Gaye claim for example), with sometimes competing claims to copyright, or a complete absence of clear ownership. Content featuring these is likely to be blocked. Smaller creators producing parody content (think of the many times that the famous bunker scene from Downfall has been used) will also likely find their content blocked.

The scale of the task may lead to fast moving topical content being compromised. Larger rights holders and publishers will struggle to administer Article 13, due to the sheer scale of the task, even when there is clear ownership, leading to content being held up in long approval queues.

While the concept behind Article 13 is admirable, to ensure copyright holders get properly recognised and compensated, this current directive is too draconian to work as intended. It's at risk of throttling out a lot of smaller, very creative content that beings diversity and creativity to the internet and world at large, and stacks the deck much more in favour of the larger global music and creative companies who have the resources to administer their content with the publishers. The final vote by the EU is scheduled for Jan 2019, so there is time to still lobby for a radical re-think.

Matt Whittingham

For more on this topic :

Google's PDF on Article 13 Myths here

Motherboard article "Europe's New Copyright Rules Are Like YouTube's Content ID System—for the Entire Internet"

The Verge "YouTube to the music industry: here's the money"

https://saveyourinternet.eu/