Does Google lie to us about Article 13 voted in the European Parliament?

Explanatory note from the European Parliament clarifies some important aspects of Article 13 and Article 11 recently voted on.

The last hours are being crazy and an avalanche of information crossed regarding what Article 13 and Article 11 of the European Union mean. These articles renamed as Article 15 and Article 17, respectively. A controversial document where they exist and that has had a lot of media presence due to the frontal position of Google, among other platforms. Yesterday was a real informational dislocation in this regard, although today we sat down with more calm to see what the European Parliament says.

What does the new directive change?

We are seeing a lot of talk about these articles, especially by stakeholders like Google, Facebook and others. The directive actually, according to a press release from the European Parliament, does not change anything.

“It is important to emphasize that the legislative project does not create new rights for creators and journalists. It only guarantees a better application of the rights already recognized… The norm does not impose new obligations for online platforms or for news aggregators. It simply ensures that they respect their obligations. What is now legal and can be shared will remain legal and can continue to be shared. "

Above all, he emphasizes that "what is now legal and allowed to share, will continue to be legal and can continue to be shared." This clears the doubts that are had in this regard. The counterpart is in "the internet giants and the news aggregators will have to pay the content creators." That is where the problem arises.

Is there really censorship?

The informative and clarifying note highlights that "the proposed directive is not directed at private users." Contrary to what is happening right now, it will be the tech giants responsible for the content. It seeks to force YouTube, Facebook or Google News to create agreements that duly remunerate content creators.

But the document also adds that: “The legislative project contains specific provisions that oblige member states to protect the freedom to upload and share content with the intention of citing, criticizing, caricaturing, parodying or imitating. Obviously, this will ensure that the memes and GIFs remain available. In fact, they are more protected than before, since until now they were covered by different national laws, with the consequent divergences. "

So why is it said that there will be censorship?

This is where all the trouble comes from. Google News, YouTube, Facebook, and other tech giants are forced to pay content creators. The problem is that until now, these platforms were not responsible for absolutely anything. If there was a video on YouTube, for example, Google was not responsible for anything. At most, I would hit you with a strike and then you would already manage with the content creators.

As stated in the explanatory note, what is sought is to protect the user and that the platform is responsible. Here the benefits of the tech giant come into play. As long as the video is online and generates income, the platform takes its share and even all of the income if it is forced to remove the content. But it is also that what is paid to content creators, such as musicians or journalists to receive a fair income. It will be the platform who must reach different agreements with the content creators and being responsible.

There will be censorship, because they will not want to pay

The strategy of Google, YouTube or Facebook, among others, will be to develop filters and censor. They don't want to lose their privileges or lose their multi-million dollar income going to tax havens. Therefore, they will start applying extremely restrictive filters to content creators, even if they are legitimate. It will be these platforms who censor, not the European Union with the norm.

Conclusion

In the end it seems that the interest of the technological giants to maintain their beach bars will prevail over freedom. It will be these platforms that will really censor and not the voted articles. The problem seems to be that the European Union has not carried out a good information campaign in this regard. It is also worth noting that the campaign carried out by the tech giants has been viral.