The EU’s Article 17: A manageable UGC disaster?
I remember my surprise clearly just days ago -- so skeptical that I nearly did a double take, asking myself, did it pass? It was the moment I first read that, by a vote of 348 votes to 274, the European Parliament had voted to adopt a copyright reform that could, among other things, change how user-generated content (UGC) is used and leveraged on the Internet. Julia Reda, a German MEP who opposed the measure, said it was a “dark day for internet freedom.”
As someone who makes their living as a digital policy consultant, now is the time for us all to pay attention to the Article 17 (formerly known as Article 13) debate. While I do not consider myself a regulation “alarmist,” and firmly believe that every company and organization should have comprehensive digital policies and practices, Article 17 will most likely have some genuine consequences to business, intended or otherwise.
For many marketing-dependent businesses, such as GoPro and TripAdvisor, UGC is a dream come true. It is incredibly inexpensive and frees staff for other business efforts. Done right, UGC does a better job of increasing brand engagement than traditional promotional activities. Users are twice as likely to share UGC than content generated by a brand; not to mention the search engine optimization benefits. In some fashion, Article 17 will change all of that.
Article 17 transfers responsibility for copyright infringement from individuals who create the content to the owners of the platform where content resides. The first update in copyright law since the beginning of the century, Article 17 would impact more than the big technology and social media companies. It will likely affect every business that has UGC embedded into its digital marketing or communications. Outside of the large tech and internet behemoths, it appears that the only way to enforce the law is for businesses to pre-moderate content and verifies that what is being uploaded does not infringe copyrights. Organizations will no longer be able to rely on that disclaimer on the upload box as they have to date.
Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and others provide a wealth of digital marketing opportunities to large and small organizations. Businesses enjoy customer reviews and posts to social media touting good products and services. That could all change, particularly if the publishing of UGC slows or becomes outdated before it is live. Some UGC will be blocked. Neither bodes well for the voice of the customer.
The world of marketing and user advertising through content generation could change as we know it. And not for the better! What are some likely scenarios?
EU member states have two years to integrate Article 17 requirements into their local laws. We have a good sense of how the process works given last year's adoption of the EU's General Data Protection Regulation.
The good news is that business everywhere, if unified, could influence the interpretation, if not enforcement, of the measure. Improving copyright practices immediately could stave off the most stringent enforcement scenarios and afford the big platforms (e.g., Facebook, Google) less scrutiny, which would benefit other businesses as well.
Social media and sizeable digital publishing companies are a bit like the pre-1984 telcos. They define both the UGC rules engine and the advertising, reaping benefits on both ends, all the while shaping the digital marketing industry. Given our lack of comprehensive industry standards or even a standard-bearing body, it is unlikely that we will hear the alarm sound soon with a call for all enterprises to do the right thing and respect copyrights. In its absence, consider these activities:
While I see issues with this new law, fundamentally I firmly believe that companies creating smart, sound, and comprehensive digital policies and practices. Of course, they ensure that a business complies with regulations; but, counterintuitively, they help the bottom line, unlock opportunity and streamline operations.
So don't bury your head and hope that this new regulation will go away or not impact the United States. Most countries offer protection to foreign works under certain conditions that have been greatly simplified by international copyright treaties and conventions. You might be operating in the US and other non-EU countries, but the new law could spell the death of your UGC efforts. Get ahead of it now, while there is still time!
KRISTINA PODNAR is a digital policy innovator. For over two decades, she has worked with some of the most high-profile companies in the world and has helped them see policies as opportunities to free the organization from uncertainty, risk, and internal chaos. Podnar’s approach brings in marketing, human resources, IT, legal, compliance, security, and procurement to create digital policies and practices that comply with regulations, unlock opportunity, strengthen the brand and liberate employees.
Podnar speaks regularly at industry conferences, contributes articles to publications, and delivers masterclasses on digital policy. Podnar is the Principal of NativeTrust Consulting, LLC. She has a BA in international studies and an MBA in international business from the Dominican University of California and is certified as both a Change Management Practitioner (APMG International) and a Project Management Professional (Project Management Institute). Her new book, The Power of Digital Policy: A practical guide to minimizing risk and maximizing opportunity for your organization, is available on Amazon and through other fine booksellers. For more information, visit Kristina @ www.kpodnar.com and on LinkedIn and Twitter.
==================
A weekly report on education news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else — from the nation’s leading voice on education innovation and opportunity.
You may be wondering what happened to your exhilarating, weekly report about the education reform circuit. Well what happened is easy to explain.
DISRUPTION!
We were disrupted this week in the best of all ways - by thousands of CEOs, leaders and ed tech innovators who gathered for ASU GSV X, the world’s leading education and workforce summit. It’s the tenth annual summit, where leaders who are carving out new, accelerated paths to improve the “Arc of Human Potential” unite to conquer.
And the global diversity was palpable.
While hallways of the Manchester Grand Hyatt in San Diego were buzzing all day with sidebars and small conversations, on stages the summiteers were challenged by leaders like the inspiring president of Arizona State University, Michael Crow, who with the CEO of Starbucks and major investors demonstrated how we can treat employees not as “commodities,” but as “lifelong learners.” Giving them access to an education is the just the start.
We heard research that shows that Student happiness is directly correlated to school climate. Emotional intelligence matters, Yale’s Marc Brackett , showed us.
We heard from the unicorns of ed tech companies that are changing the way education is delivered and expanding its potential infinitely. Check out Coursera’s Jeff Maggioncalda, VIPKID CEO Cindy Mi, Markus Witte of Babbel; and Dun Xiao, Co-founder of 17EdTech - here. Todd Rose of “End of Average” Fame interviewed CZI co-founder and Facebook founder spouse Priscilla Chan, and JD Vance weighed in on reimagining rural education.
Start ups pitched, established companies debated, and investors hovered and engaged.
The 2019 Innovator of Color Award went to Michael Sorrell, President of the pathbreaking Paul Quinn College , the nation’s only urban work college, who spoke movingly about the ability to help shape other’s lives. “My father never set foot on a college campus but now I am a college president.”
Indeed so many of the entrepreneurs who are leading global companies talked of their struggles as children - as refugees, often being cast aside, failing in school, and suffering once unimaginable traumas, making their work, and their companies, personal passions as well as successful endeavors.
Finally, Jeanne Allen led a provocative panel discussion “No Struggle, No Progress - An Argument for a Return to Black Schools,” which was kicked off by Howard Fuller, who was joined by leaders of two outstanding schools, Candice Burns, of Friendship Charter Schools; and Lloyd Knight, of TC Howe in Indianapolis. That session will be featured next week, on Reality Check.
But don’t take our word for it. Listen for yourself! Reality Check captured the flavor of the confab, interviewing for the weekly podcast unique actors working to drive exponential impact from “pre-K–Gray”. This episode features 7 outstanding innovators. Listen in to just a smattering of what’s happening in the landscape and tune in tomorrow for the next installment of “Reality Check Live at ASU GSV 2019”.
Don’t forget to subscribe to Reality Check with Jeanne Allen wherever you enjoy your podcasts. And let us know if you have any ideas on how we can bring these and more critical stories of education innovation and disruption to more people.
We will return to our regularly scheduled newswire programming next week – unless we discover some more disruptions worth waiting for! Until then, be sure to follow @edreform on Twitter and let us know what we can do to help you accelerate education so that all participate in the future.
Founded in 1993, the Center for Education Reform aims to expand educational opportunities that lead to improved economic outcomes for all Americans — particularly our youth — ensuring that conditions are ripe for innovation, freedom and flexibility throughout U.S. education.
===================
epresentative Cheryl Acton’s Statement on Federal Lawsuit Against HB 136
SALT LAKE CITY, UT (4/10/2019) – On Wednesday, April 10, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU of Utah filed a federal lawsuit against Utah’s new abortion law set to go into effect on May 14 of this year. Representative Cheryl Acton, the sponsor of the legislation, prepared the following statement:
Though I cannot say that I welcomed a lawsuit against HB136, I did expect one because the ACLU and Planned Parenthood use the threat and cost of litigation to intimidate states into maintaining the status quo on abortion, regardless of the sentiments of the people of those states.
Planned Parenthood makes a lot of money on the abortion of babies, and HB136 threatens that revenue stream. Both organizations capitalize on lawsuits in their fundraising efforts, so they cannot be said to be unbiased on the issue.
HB136 was passed by elective representatives expressing the will of the people of Utah. That is the proper way for laws to be passed, according to our state and federal Constitution.
I ran HB136, limiting elective abortion to 18 weeks, for four primary reasons:
1) The physical, psychological, and future fertility health of women, because abortion's risks to women increase exponentially with gestation. The increased rate of suicide and mental health issues are especially well documented.
2) Fetal pain perception, which increases over gestation with all circuitry in place by 18 weeks. We can now observe pain perception with fetal pulse, blood flow, and stress hormones. We also have a real-time window into the womb through advanced ultrasound technology.
3) The abortion procedure used in second trimester abortion shocks the conscience. The abortionist dismembers a living baby in the womb then re-assembles the body on a tray to ensure that all parts were removed. In Utah, we have laws against dismembering a human corpse, but it is lawful to dismember a living unborn child. Interestingly, this procedure was not used in 1973, when Roe v Wade was handed down.
4) Most countries, including most Western European countries, limit abortion to the first trimester, or 12-13 weeks. HB136 preserves a woman's right to choose abortion for any reason at all until 18 weeks, and allows an array of exceptions after 18 weeks (longer than one NFL football season), including one new exception. (Those exceptions are rape, incest, life of the mother, permanent impairment of the mother, fatal fetal defect, and severe fetal brain abnormality.)
Utah should be leading out on this issue, because the vast majority of Utahns oppose abortion, especially in the second trimester. (According to a Gallup poll conducted in May 2018, even 72% of people nationally oppose second trimester abortion.) With the nation's highest birthrate, Utah should be the safest place in the nation for all people, especially children, born and unborn.
It is my hope that abortion law will be returned to the states, where it resided prior to Roe, so that the people of each state may decide the issue in the normal legislative process.
