120121COMMUNIA_comment_on_Finnish proposal.pdf
Here is a quick analysis of the impact of the the proposed blocking procedure on users and rightholders. This focusses on the "front end" (the initial matching of user uploads + the initial blocking request) of the proposed procedure and does not look at the second stage (de-blocking request and ADR). Each scenario looks at the impact on rightholders and uploaders (the impact on platforms is the same for all scenarios: It provides a high level of legal and operational certainty at the cost of having to implement ACR technology which will likely be a substantial burden for smaller platforms).
Uploaders have to provide a justification for all uploads that contain third party works (without being prompted):
→ This asks a lot from users → likely discourages sharing (only benefit is that it allows/promotes labeling of CC/PD even when there is no wrong rightholder claim)
→ This will likely lead to substantial numbers of justified notifications that rightholders will have to deal with (especially when users have the ability to select standardised justifications) → very ressource intensive for RHs
Uploaders are prompted to provide a justification for all uploads that match a third party work claimed by a rightholder.
→ This asks a lot from users (but slightly less cognitive overhead) → likely discourages sharing (Benefit: This ensures that use under exceptions overrides licensed uses)
→ This will likely lead to substantial numbers of justified notifications that rightholders will have to deal with (especially when users have the ability to select standardised justifications) → very ressource intensive for RHs (Same as in scenario 1)
Uploaders are prompted to provide a justification for all uploads that match third party works for which rightholders have indicated that they would like them to be blocked.
→ Uploaders will need to provide justification in fewer cases → much better user experience
→ Rightholders will have to deal with smaller number of justified notifications → less ressource intensive for RHs
Uploaders are prompted to provide a justification for all uploads that match third party works for which rightholders have indicated that they would like them to be blocked and rightholders can specify blocking criteria (i.e "no block requested for snippets shorter than x").
→ Uploaders will need to provide justification in fewer cases → much better user experience
→ Rightholders will have to deal with smaller number of justified notifications. rightholders can tailor volume of justified notifications → least ressource intensive for RHs