2) The “compromise” explains that users should have a redress mechanism if their rights are restricted AND that “”.
What Voss fails to explain is how individual users can complain if the provider has not stored any personal data about the content that they have unfairly deleted.
What makes the proposal so malicious is the alleged possibility to eliminate dangers for the freedom of expression through licensing agreements.
Yet, the reality is that these licensing agreements are only a realistic option for the biggest platforms.
To sum up, Voss’ “compromise” would leave most websites the choice between the devil and the deep blue sea.
In line with the original extreme position of the Commission, Voss proposes that these rules should apply to platforms where users upload “significant amounts” of content.
If the proposal is accepted, websites such as Soundcloud, e Bay, Facebook and Flickr will be forced to filter everything you want to upload.Use the hashtag #Censorship Machine or #filterfail and let your representatives know you’re against the internet filter (Article 13)!You can find the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) relevant to you here: We’ve written some tweets to inspire you, but feel free to compose your own!On 21 February, the rapporteur of the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) Axel Voss issued his suggestion for a “compromise” on the Copyright reform, on which the Committee will vote in April.As expected, Voss’ proposal maintains the highly controversial Article 13, which forces web services to impose a “censorship machine” to filter all uploads from every user in the EU.