"Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter."
Now, as written, that seems to be not so bad for Youtube who already have content-ID for the rightsholders, but bad for other competing services starting up which would have to develop it?
I think it would be pretty good for YouTube, as you say, if it wasn't for:
> The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter.
If I hold the right to any video, or music, YouTube is now required to tell me how their system for identifying copy-right violations work. I suspect this is the part they don't like, because their system does in fact not work particularly well. It works as well as any technical person would expect, but a lawyer at Sony or Disney will have unreasonable expectations about the correctness of Content-ID.
That's the intent. A lot of EU regulations are written in a way that could be interpreted in almost any way, making it impossible to be 100% compliant and leaving you at the mercy of politically-minded regulators.
> Now, as written, that seems to be not so bad for X who already have Y, but bad for other competing services starting up which would have to develop it?
That is generally the cause, effect and purpose of all government regulations, yes. (for all valid combinations of incumbent megacorp X and costly item Y)
"Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation with rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter."
Now, as written, that seems to be not so bad for Youtube who already have content-ID for the rightsholders, but bad for other competing services starting up which would have to develop it?