company:die zeit

  • Atlantik-Brücke and the ACG
    http://www.transatlanticperspectives.org/entry.php?rec=133
    Des fois que vous nauriez jamais compris pourquoi l’Allemagne est le meilleur ami des USA en Europe voici le résumé de la thèse d’Anne Zetsche

    Transatlantic institutions organizing German-American elite networking since the early 1950s

    Author » Anne Zetsche, Northumbria University Published: November 28, 2012 Updated: February 28, 2013

    The Cold War era witnessed an increasing transnational interconnectedness of individuals and organizations in the cultural, economic and political sphere. In this period, two organizations, the Atlantik-Brücke and the American Council on Germany, established themselves as influential facilitators, enabling German-American elite networking throughout the second half of the twentieth century and beyond. The two organizations brought together influential politicians and businesspeople, as well as representatives of the media and the academic world.

    Efforts in this regard commenced in the early days of the Cold War, only a few years after the end of World War II. In 1949, two American citizens and two Germans began developing the plan to found the Atlantik-Brücke in West Germany and a sister organization, the American Council on Germany (ACG), in the United States. Their plan was to use these two organizations as vehicles to foster amicable relations between the newly founded Federal Republic of Germany and the United States of America. Only a few years prior, Americans and Germans had faced each other as enemies during World War II and many segments of German society, including West German elites, held strong, long-standing anti-American sentiments. The U.S. public in turn was skeptical as to whether Germans could indeed be denazified and convinced to develop a democratic system. Thus, in order to forge a strong Western alliance against Soviet Communism that included West Germany it was critical to overcome mutual prejudices and counter anti-Americanism in Western Europe. It was to be one of the central tasks of the Atlantik-Brücke and the ACG to achieve this in West Germany.

    Individuals at the Founding of the Atlantik-Brücke and the ACG

    One of the founders of the Atlantik-Brücke and the ACG was Eric M. Warburg. He was a Jewish-American banker originally from Hamburg where his ancestors had founded the family’s banking house in 1798. Due to Nazi Aryanisation and expropriation policies, the Warburg family lost the company in 1938 and immigrated to the United States, settling in New York. In spite of the terror of the Nazi regime, Eric Warburg was very attached to Hamburg. He became a vibrant transatlantic commuter after World War II, living both in Hamburg and in New York. In the intertwined histories of the Atlantik-Brücke and the ACG, Warburg played a special role, becoming their leading facilitator and mediator.

    Not long after his escape from the Nazis, Warburg met Christopher Emmet, a wealthy publicist and political activist who shared Warburg’s strong anti-communist stance and attachment to pre-Nazi Germany. On the German side of this transatlantic relationship, Warburg and Emmet were joined by Marion Countess Dönhoff, a journalist at the liberal West German weekly Die Zeit, and by Erik Blumenfeld, a Christian Democratic politician and businessmen. There were two main characteristics shared by the original core founders of the Atlantik-Brücke and the ACG: firstly, each one of the founding quartet belonged to an elite – economic, social or political – and was therefore well-connected with political, diplomatic, business and media circles in both the United States and Germany. Secondly, there was a congruence of basic dispositions among them, namely a staunch anti-communist stance, a transatlantic orientation, and an endorsement of Germany’s integration into the West.

    The Western powers sought the economic and political integration of Western Europe to overcome the devastation of Europe, to revive the world economy, and to thwart nationalism and militarism in Europe after World War II. Germany was considered Europe’s economic powerhouse and thus pivotal in the reconstruction process. West Germany also needed to be on board with security and defense policies in order to face the formidable opponent of Soviet Communism. Since the Federal Republic shared a border with the communist bloc, the young state was extremely vulnerable to potential Soviet aggression and was at the same time strategically important within the Western bloc. Elite organizations like the Atlantik-Brücke and the ACG were valuable vehicles to bring West Germany on board for this ambitious Cold War project.

    Thus, in 1952 and 1954 respectively, the ACG and the Atlantik-Brücke were incorporated and granted non-profit status with the approval of John J. McCloy, U.S. High Commissioner to Germany (1949-1952). His wife Ellen McCloy was one of signatories of the ACG’s certificate of incorporation and served as its director for a number of years. The Atlantik-Brücke (originally Transatlantik-Brücke) was incorporated and registered in Hamburg.

    Transatlantic Networking

    The main purpose of both organizations was to inform Germans and Americans about the respective other country, to counter mutual prejudices, and thus contributing to the development of amicable relations between the Federal Republic of Germany and the United States in the postwar era. This was to be achieved by all means deemed appropriate, but with a special focus on arranging personal meetings and talks between representatives of both countries’ business, political, academic, and media elites. One way was to sponsor lectures and provide speakers on issues relating to Germany and the United States. Another method was organizing visiting tours of German politicians, academics, and journalists to the United States and of American representatives to West Germany. Among the Germans who came to the U.S. under the sponsorship of the ACG were Max Brauer, a former Social Democratic mayor of Hamburg, Willy Brandt, the first Social Democratic Chancellor and former mayor of West Berlin, and Franz Josef Strauss, a member of the West German federal government in the 1950s and 1960s and later minister president of the German federal state of Bavaria. American visitors to the Federal Republic were less prominent. Annual reports of the Atlantik-Brücke explicitly mention George Nebolsine of the New York law firm Coudert Brothers and member of the International Chamber of Commerce, and the diplomats Henry J. Tasca, William C. Trimble, and Nedville E. Nordness.

    In the late 1950s the officers of the Atlantik-Brücke and the ACG sought ways of institutionalizing personal encounters between key Americans and Germans. Thus they established the German-American Conferences modeled on the British-German Königswinter Conferences and the Bilderberg Conferences. The former brought together English and German elites and were organized by the German-English Society (later German-British Society). The latter were organized by the Bilderberg Group, founded by Joseph Retinger, Paul van Zeeland and Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands. Those conferences began in 1954 and were informal, off-the-record meetings of American and West European representatives of business, media, academia and politics. Each of these conference series was important for the coordination of Western elites during the Cold War era. Bilderberg was critical in paving the way for continental European integration and the German-British effort was important for reconciling the European wartime enemies.

    From 1959 onwards, the German-American Conferences took place biennially, alternating between venues in West Germany and the United States. At the first conference in Bonn, 24 Americans came together with 27 Germans, among them such prominent individuals as Dean Acheson, Henry Kissinger, and John J. McCloy on the American side, and Willy Brandt, Arnold Bergstraesser (considered to be one of the founding fathers of postwar political science in Germany), and Kurt Georg Kiesinger (third Christian Democratic Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany and former minister president of the federal state Baden-Württemberg) on the German side. By 1974 the size of the delegations had increased continuously, reaching 73 American and 63 German participants.

    A central goal in selecting the delegations was to arrange for a balanced, bipartisan group of politicians, always including representatives of the Social and Christian Democrats (e.g. Fritz Erler, Kurt Birrenbach) on the German side and both Democratic and Republican senators and representatives (e.g. Henry S. Reuss, Jacob Javits) on the American side, along with academics, journalists, and businessmen. Prominent American academics attending several of the German-American conferences included Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski. Representatives of major media outlets were Marion Countess Dönhoff of Germany’s major liberal weekly Die Zeit, Kurt Becker, editor of the conservative daily newspaper Die Welt, and Hellmut Jaesrich, editor of the anticommunist cultural magazine Der Monat. The business community was prominently represented by John J. McCloy, the president of the Chase Manhattan Bank, and Herman Georg Kaiser, an oil producer from Tulsa, Oklahoma. From Germany, Gotthard von Falkenhausen and Eric Warburg represented the financial sector and Alexander Menne, a member of the executive board of Farbwerke Hoechst, represented German industry.

    Officers of the Atlantik-Brücke and the ACG were mainly in charge of selecting the delegates for the conferences. However, Shepard Stone of the Ford Foundation also had an influential say in this process. In the late 1950s and 1960s he was director of the foundation’s international program and thus responsible for allocating funds to the ACG to facilitate the German-American conferences. Shepard Stone was deeply attached to Germany as he had pursued graduate studies in Berlin in the Weimar period, earning a doctoral degree in history. After World War II he returned to Germany as a public affairs officer of the U.S. High Commission. Stone’s continuing interest in German affairs and friendship with Eric Warburg and Marion Dönhoff regularly brought him to Germany, and he was a frequent participant in the German-American conferences.

    The German-American Conferences and Cold War Politics

    All matters discussed during the conferences stood under the headline “East-West tensions” in the earlier period and later “East-West issues” signaling the beginning of détente, but always maintaining a special focus on U.S.-German relations. The debates from the late 1950s to the early/mid-1970s can be categorized as follows: firstly, bilateral relations between the U.S. and the FRG; secondly, Germany’s relation with the Western alliance; thirdly, Europe and the United States in the Atlantic Alliance; and last but not least, relations between the West, the East, and the developing world. The conferences served three central purposes: firstly, developing a German-American network of elites; secondly, building consensus on key issues of the Cold War period; and thirdly, forming a common Western, transatlantic identity among West Germans and Americans.

    Another emphasis of both groups’ activities in the United States and Germany was the production of studies and other publications (among others, The Vanishing Swastika, the Bridge, Meet Germany, a Newsletter, Hans Wallenberg’s report Democratic Institutions, and the reports on the German-American Conferences). Studies aimed at informing Germans about developments in the United States and American international policies on the one hand, and at informing the American people about West Germany’s progress in denazification, democratization, and re-education on the other. The overall aim of these activities was first and foremost improving each country’s and people’s image in the eyes of the counterpart’s elites and wider public.

    The sources and amounts of available funds to the ACG and the Atlantik-Brücke differed considerably. Whereas the latter selected its members very carefully by way of cooptation especially among businessmen and CEOs to secure sound funding of its enterprise, the former opened membership or affiliation to basically anyone who had an interest in Germany. As a result, the ACG depended heavily, at least for its everyday business, on the fortune of the organization’s executive vice president Christopher Emmet. Emmet personally provided the salaries of ACG secretaries and set up the organization’s offices in his private apartment in New York’s upper Westside. In addition, the ACG relied on funds granted by the Ford Foundation especially for the biannual German-American conferences as well as for the publication of a number of studies. The Atlantik-Brücke in turn benefitted immensely from public funds for its publications and the realization of the German-American conferences. The Federal Press and Information Agency (Bundespresse- und Informationsamt, BPA) supported mainly publication efforts of the organization and the Federal Foreign Office (Auswärtiges Amt) regularly granted funds for the conferences.

    Politics, Business and Membership Growth

    Membership of the Atlantik-Brücke grew from 12 in 1954 to 65 in 1974. Among them were representatives of companies like Mannesmann, Esso, Farbwerke Hoechst, Daimler Benz, Deutsche Bank, and Schering. Those members were expected to be willing and able to pay annual membership fees of 3000 to 5000 DM (approx. $750 to $1,250 in 1955, equivalent to approx. $6,475 to $10,793 today). Since the business community always accounted for the majority of Atlantik-Brücke membership compared to members from academia, media and politics, the organization operated on secure financial footing compared to its American counterpart. The ACG had not even established formal membership like its German sister organization. The people affiliated with the ACG in the 1950s up to the mid-1970s were mostly academics, intellectuals, and journalists. It posed a great difficulty for ACG officers to attract business people willing and able to contribute financially to the organization at least until the mid-1970s. When Christopher Emmet, the ACG’s “heart and soul,” passed away in 1974, the group’s affiliates and directors were mostly comprised of Emmet’s circle of friends and acquaintances who shared an interest in U.S.-German relations and Germany itself. Emmet had enlisted most of them during his frequent visits to the meeting of the Council on Foreign Relations. Another group of prominent members represented the military. Several leading figures of the U.S. occupying forces and U.S. High Commission personnel joined the ACG, in addition to ranking politicians and U.S. diplomats. The ACG’s long term president, George N. Shuster had served as Land Commissioner for Bavaria during 1950-51. In 1963, Lucius D. Clay, former military governor of the U.S. zone in Germany, 1947-49, joined the ACG as honorary chairman. George McGhee, the former ambassador to Germany prominently represented U.S. diplomacy when he became director of the organization in 1969.

    Although the Atlantik-Brücke had initially ruled out board membership for active politicians, they were prominently represented. Erik Blumenfeld, for example, was an influential Christian Democratic leader in Hamburg. In 1958 he was elected CDU chairman of the federal city state of Hamburg and three years later he became a member of the Bundestag.In the course of the 1960s and 1970s more politicians joined the Atlantik-Brücke and became active members of the board: Kurt Birrenbach (CDU), Fritz Erler (SPD), W. Alexander Menne (FDP), and Helmut Schmidt (SPD). Thus, through their members and affiliates both organizations have been very well-connected with political, diplomatic, and business elites.

    Besides individual and corporate contributions, both organizations relied on funding from public and private institutions and agencies. On the German side federal agencies like the Foreign Office, the Press and Information Agency, and the Chancellery provided funding for publications and supported the German-American conferences. On the American side additional funds were provided almost exclusively by the Ford Foundation.

    Although both groups were incorporated as private associations with the objective of furthering German-American relations in the postwar era, their membership profile and sources of funding clearly illustrate that they were not operating at great distance from either public politics or official diplomacy. On the contrary, the Atlantik-Brücke and the ACG represent two prominent actors in a transnational elite networking project with the aim of forging a strong anti-communist Atlantic Alliance among the Western European states and the United States of America. In this endeavor to back up public with private authority, the Atlantik-Brücke and the ACG functioned as major conduits of both transnational and transcultural exchange and transfer processes.

    #Europe #Allemagne #USA #politique #guerre #impérialisme #élites

  • Estonie. Climat de guerre froide à la frontière russe

    En 2016, le photographe italien #Alessandro_Gandolfi s’est rendu en Estonie, tout près de la frontière russe, pour y réaliser cette série intitulée “Estonie. La nouvelle Crimée ?” Selon lui, un rideau de fer s’est à nouveau abattu sur l’Europe. Et plus précisément dans cet État. Ce pays Balte, aujourd’hui membre de l’Union européenne et de l’Otan, faisait partie de l’Union soviétique pendant la première guerre froide. Aujourd’hui, il se retrouve au beau milieu de la partie qui se joue entre Washington et Moscou. “Il me semblait intéressant de raconter le quotidien des Estoniens, surtout ceux qui vivent à la frontière avec la Russie. Ils sont russophones pour la plupart, pro-Poutine et peu intégrés”, explique Alessandro Gandolfi à Courrier international.

    Depuis que la Russie a annexé la Crimée en 2014, l’Estonie craint d’être la prochaine victime de son expansionnisme. L’Otan est d’ailleurs en train d’intensifier sa présence militaire le long de la frontière balte. En 2017, son budget pour cette région est monté à 3,4 milliards de dollars, et l’organisation y a détaché des milliers de soldats supplémentaires. De plus, le nombre de civils qui rejoignent des milices de volontaires ne cesse de croître.
    Né en 1970 à Parme, Alessandro Gandolfi a été journaliste au quotidien La Repubblica avant de se consacrer au photojournalisme à partir de 2001. Il a cofondé l’agence Parallelozero à Milan. Son travail, publié dans de nombreux titres internationaux comme Time, Die Zeit et National Geographic, a été plusieurs fois primé.


    https://www.courrierinternational.com/diaporama/estonie-climat-de-guerre-froide-la-frontiere-russe

    #Estonie #frontières #Russie #photographie
    ping @reka @albertocampiphoto

  • Ah ! Les #moutons_noirs... les revoilà, en #Allemagne :


    #criminels_étrangers
    –-> il y a un tag spécialement dédié sur seenthis, si jamais : https://seenthis.net/tag/criminels_%C3%A9trangers

    #modèle_suisse ?

    En lien avec mon billet publié sur @visionscarto :
    En Suisse, pieds nus contre rangers

    Septembre 2015 : au cœur de ce que l’Europe appelle sa « plus grande crise migratoire depuis la fin de la seconde guerre mondiale », les consciences se réveillent-elles enfin ? Après des années de monopolisation du débat public par les discours haineux de l’extrême droite, citoyens et migrants s’organisent pour exprimer leur indignation face au sort des réfugiés. Le point en Suisse, où l’image des pieds nus s’oppose à celle des rangers.


    https://visionscarto.net/en-suisse-pieds-nus-contre-rangers
    #suisse

    Source de l’image de Chemnitz :
    Saluts #nazis et slogans anti-immigrés : récit d’un “jour de honte” à #Chemnitz

    Des milliers de sympathisants d’extrême droite se sont réunis lundi soir dans cette ville de Saxe, aux cris de “L’Allemagne aux Allemands, les étrangers dehors”. La discipline a rapidement dégénéré.
    Ce devait être une marche funèbre, souligne le journal allemand Die Zeit. Mais la manifestation qui s’est déroulée lundi soir à Chemnitz, en Saxe, n’avait rien de solennelle. Deux jours après le meurtre d’un Allemand d’une trentaine d’années dans une rixe, pour lequel ont été arrêtés un Irakien et un Syrien, environ 2.000 sympathisants d’extrême droite ont réclamé que le gouvernement garantisse “la sécurité de ses citoyens”, au cours d’un rassemblement qui a rapidement dégénéré. “Jour de Honte à Chemnitz”, titre mardi le quotidien Bild, listant les violences et les slogans nazis recensés lors de la manifestation. Sur son situation web, Der Spiegel va plus loin, allant jusqu’à comparer les “foules excitées d’extrême droite” de Chemnitz et le caractère “dépassé” de l’État de droit à “la discipline de la République de Weimar”.”La custom plutôt que l’invasion”. À l’initiative de plusieurs organisations dont le mouvement anti-islam Pegida et le parti native Pro-Chemnitz, qui compte trois élus au conseil municipal de la ville, les participants se sont réunis lundi en fin d’après-midi sur la characteristic Karl Marx. Des reportages et vidéos amateurs réalisés sur les lieux montrent majoritairement de jeunes hommes au visage parfois masqué, portant des vêtements sombres. Mais aussi des femmes, comme une sexagénaire interrogée par Der Spiegel, venue manifester son désaccord “avec l’arrivée de tant d’étrangers”. “Je me demande pourquoi mes impôts sont dépensés pour eux. Ils veulent tous être footballeur professionnel ou chanteur, mais quand on leur demande de porter des planches pendant une journée, ils ont mal au dos.”A #Chemnitz, t-shirt « Rapefugees no longer welcome » – ou quand les réfugiés sont tout simplement assimilés à des violeurs… pic.twitter.com/nwjfjIeB6w— Thomas Wieder (@ThomasWieder) 27 août 2018Sur les drapeaux et les t-shirts, des slogans sans équivoque : “la custom plutôt que l’invasion” ou encore “nous sommes multicolores, jusqu’à ce que le sang coule”. Au mégaphone, un jeune homme crie “vous êtes Allemands” et donne le départ du cortège. Selon Die Zeit, une partie des sympathisants présents sont alcoolisés. Certains montrent leur postérieur aux caméras présentes. En passant devant les forces de l’ordre, beaucoup leur adressent des doigts d’honneur. D’autres ne cachent pas leur volonté d’en découdre avec un cortège de quelques centaines de militants d’extrême gauche, venus soutenir les migrants. À l’image de cette réflexion d’un manifestant à un policier, rapportée par Der Spiegel : “envoyez les femmes à la maison, et ensuite : homme contre homme.””L’Allemagne aux Allemands”. La manifestation s’envenime vers 20 heures. Débordée, la police ne peut interpeller les auteurs de saluts nazis, dont decided ne dissimulent pas leurs visages. Des pavés sont arrachés, des bouteilles jetées sur les forces de l’ordre et le camp d’en face. Les engins pyrotechniques et projectiles font plusieurs blessés, mais les slogans ne cessent pas : “L’Allemagne aux Allemands, les étrangers dehors”.Neonazis setzen sich ohne Absprache mit Polizei in Bewegung. Einer macht den Hitlergruß. #Chemnitz#c2708pic.twitter.com/tto1GroPe3— Felix Huesmann (@felixhuesmann) 27 août 2018″Il y a quelques mois j’étais à Kandel, où une adolescente allemande s’est fait trucider par un réfugié afghan”, témoigne auprès du Mondeun manifestant venu spécialement de Cologne pour le rassemblement. “Aujourd’hui je suis à Chemnitz, où un père de famille allemand s’est, fait, lui aussi, poignarder par des réfugiés. (…) Quand il s’agit de sauver son pays, il faut être prêt à tout.” Vers 22 heures, la police annonce le retour au calme sur Twitter. Mais jusqu’à quand ? Une nouvelle manifestation est annoncée mardi après-midi à Dresde, voisine de Chemnitz et capitale de la Saxe, où l’extrême droite est fortement implantée. Elle y est arrivée en tête des dernières législatives en septembre 2017, créant un séisme politique en Allemagne.Qui est à l’origine de ces rassemblements ?Dimanche soir déjà, quelques centaines de militants d’extrême droite avaient lancé dans les rues de Chemnitz des “chasses collectives” contre des étrangers, dont plusieurs ont été blessés. Au sein de la ville “une alliance assez incroyable mêlant des hooligans, des néonazis, l’AfD (le parti d’extrême droite Different für Deutschland, ndlr) et les militants de Pegida s’est constituée”, a estimé la directrice de la Fondation Amadeu Antonio contre le racisme sur la chaîne de télévision allemande n-tv, mardi. “Les violences montrent que des mouvements se réunissent qui au final sont tous issus du même moule, le tout dans une atmosphère extrêmement xénophobe et agressive.””Les premières émeutes contre les étrangers ont eu lieu en Saxe après la réunification, il y a plus de 25 ans. Depuis tout ce temps, le gouvernement fédéral les a négligées, relativisées et minimisées”, élargit le Berliner Morgenpost, mardi, évoquant d’autres manifestations de hooligans difficilement contenues par la police ces dernières années.

    https://newsline.com/2018/08/28/saluts-nazis-et-slogans-anti-immigres-recit-dun-jour-de-honte-a-chemnitz
    #néo-nazis #manifestation #extrême_droite #asile #migrations #réfugiés #anti-réfugiés

  • EU copyright reform is coming. Is your startup ready?
    https://medium.com/silicon-allee/eu-copyright-reform-is-coming-is-your-startup-ready-4be81a5fabf7?source=user

    Last Friday, members of Berlin’s startup community gathered at Silicon Allee for a copyright policy roundtable discussion hosted by Allied for Startups. The event sparked debate and elicited feedback surrounding the European Commission’s complex drafted legislation that would have significant impact on startups in the EU. Our Editor-in-Chief, Julia Neuman, gives you the rundown here — along with all the details you should know about the proposed reform.

    ‘Disruption’ in the startup world isn’t always a good thing — especially when it involves challenging legislation. Over the past five years, as big data and user-generated content began to play an increasing role in our society, startups have worked tirelessly to navigate laws regarding privacy and security in order to go about business as usual. Now, they may soon be adding copyright concerns to their list of potential roadblocks.

    The forthcoming copyright reform proposed by the European Commission severely threatens the success and momentum that startups have gained in the EU, and it’s being introduced under the guise of “a more modern, more European copyright framework.”

    On September 14, 2016, the European Commission tabled its Proposal for a Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (commonly referred to as the “Copyright Directive”) — a piece of draft legislation that would have significant impact on a wide variety of modern copyrighted content. Consequently, it poses a direct threat to startups.

    Members of the startup community are now coming together, unwilling to accept these measures without a fight. On Friday, members of Allied for Startups and Silicon Allee — alongside copyright experts and Berlin-based entrepreneurs and investors — met at Silicon Allee’s new campus in Mitte for a policy roundtable discussion. Additional workshop discussions are taking place this week in Warsaw, Madrid and Paris. The ultimate goal? To get startups’ voices heard in front of policymakers and counter this legislation.
    Sparking conversation at Silicon Allee

    Bird & Bird Copyright Lawyer and IP Professor Martin Senftleben led the roundtable discussions in Berlin, outlining key clauses and offering clarifying commentary. He then invited conversation from guests — which included representatives from content-rich startups such as Fanmiles, Videopath, and Ubermetrics. The result was a well-balanced input of perspectives and testimonials that sparked an increased desire to fight back. The roundtable covered the three main areas affected by the proposed reforms: user-generated content, text and data mining, and the neighboring right for press publishers.
    User-generated content

    The internet has allowed us all to become content creators with an equal opportunity to make our voices heard around the world. With this transition comes evolving personal responsibilities. Whereas in the past, copyright law only concerned a small percentage of society — today it concerns anyone posting to social media, uploading unique content, or founding a company that relies on user-generated content as part of its business model.

    The proposed EU copyright reform shifts copyright burden to content providers, making them liable for user content and forcing them to apply content filtering technology to their platforms. As it stands now, management of copyright infringement is a passive process. Companies are not required to monitor or police user-generated content, instead waiting for infringement notices to initiate relevant takedowns.

    New laws imply that companies would have to constantly police their platforms. As you can imagine, this would quickly rack up operating costs — not to mention deter investors from committing if there’s such a inherently persistent and high legal risk for copyright infringement. Furthermore, filtering technology would not exactly promote public interest or media plurality, as an efficiency-based filtering system would be more likely to result in overblocking and censoring (even if unintentional). This result is counter to the expressed aims of the reform.

    “Having this necessity to add filtering technology from the start would kill any innovation for new startups, which is the reason why we’re all here and this economy is booming and creating jobs,” said Fabian Schmidt, Founder of Fanmiles. “The small companies suddenly cannot innovate and compete anymore.”

    Text and data mining

    The proposed reform also blocks startups from using text and data mining technology, consequently preventing the rich kind of data analysis that has added value and yielded deeper insights for growing startups. Copyright law today accounts for lawful access and consultation, however not for the automated process of reading and drawing conclusions. The scraping and mining of freely available texts could give rise to complex, costly legal problems from the get-go — problems that not even the most prudent founder teams could navigate (unless they work to the benefit of research institutions, which are exempt from the measure).

    What kind of message does this send out to new startups? As with laws dealing with user-generated content, these measures don’t entice entrepreneurs to turn their seeds of ideas into profitable companies. Nor do they get VCs jumping to invest. Data input from mining and scraping suddenly gives rise to a huge legal issue that certainly does not benefit the public interest.

    Senftleben reminded the group in Berlin that these types of legislation normally take several years to implement, and that the proposed policy could have amplified effects down the road as the role of data mining increases. “If this legislation is already limiting now, who knows what kind of text and data mining will be used in ten years and how it will play in,” he said.
    Neighboring right for press publishers

    The third and final point discussed at the roundtable has gathered the most media attention thus far. It’s the “elephant in the room,” unjustly pitting established publishers against startups. Proposed legislation creates an exclusive right for publishers that protects their content for digital use in order to “to ensure quality journalism and citizens’ access to information.”

    Sure, this reasoning sounds like a positive contribution to a free and democratic society. But closer examination reveals that these publishers’ outdated and financially unviable business models are being grandfathered in for protection at the expense of more innovative content models.

    It’s not hard to see why this is happening. Publishers have lobbying power, and they are bleeding money in today’s digital climate. “I work a lot with publishers. Their position here in Europe is a little more old school,” said one of the founders present at the discussion. “Their business model and revenues are going down, so they’re going to fight hard.”

    Axel Springer, for example, is lobbying for greater protection; they want a piece of Google’s success. But the most interesting aspect of this measure is that it’s unclear how much value it would add for publishers, who already have rights to digital reproduction from the individual content creators employed under contract with their firms. A freelance journalist contributing to Die Zeit, for example, is already transferring digital reproduction rights to the newspaper just by agreeing to publish.

    The drafted legislation makes it pretty clear that content aggregating search engines would take a big hit when they would inevitably have to pay content reproduction fees to publishers. But the interdependent relationship between publishers and online search aggregation services makes this legislation unlikely to generate a meaningful revenue stream for publishers anyway: Publishers want compensation for snippets of articles that show up on search engines, and search engines want compensation for bringing attention to them in the first place. In the end, content aggregators would likely just stop their use of content fragments instead of resorting to pay license fees to publishers.

    It’s unclear how the proposed legislation could promote media plurality and freedom; instead, it seems to promote market concentration and monopolization of content publishing, potentially stifling free and open access to information.

    “I know two small aggregators here in Germany that have given up because of this,” said Tobias Schwarz, Coworking Manager at Sankt Oberholz in Berlin.

    What comes next? Turning discussion into action

    What is clear now is that copyright law has potential to affect anyone. Startups in Europe, especially, are at risk with these new reforms. As players in the European economy, they have not been present in the policy debate so far. Allied for Startups and Silicon Allee are inviting founders, entrepreneurs, and interested members in the tech community to come forward and make their voices heard. They invite contributions to an open letter to the European Parliament which dives into this topic in more detail, explaining how toxic the Copyright Directive is for companies who are trying to stay alive without incurring €60 million in development costs.

    “A lot of startup leaders have their heads down working on their next feature, without realizing policymakers are also creating something that can instantly kill it,” said Silicon Allee co-founder Travis Todd. “But if more startups come to the table and tell others what they learned, they will become more aware of these potential roadblocks and ultimately help change them.”

    To find out more information, participate at the next discussion, or share your ideas and testimonials on this policy discussion, please get in touch! Drop a line to hello@alliedforstartups.org, tweet to @allied4startups, or join the online conversation using #copyright4startups.

  • Thomas #Piketty défend la #Grèce face à l’#Allemagne
    http://www.rtl.fr/actu/societe-faits-divers/thomas-piketty-defend-la-grece-face-a-l-allemagne-7779024792

    ... dans le journal allemand Die Zeit, il plaide pour une restructuration de la dette grecque afin de sortir Athènes d’une situation intenable mais surtout injuste. Thomas Piketty dresse un parallèle entre la situation actuelle de la Grèce et celle de l’Allemagne il y a 60 ans : l’Allemagne dit il est vraiment "le meilleur exemple d’un pays qui, au cours de l’histoire, n’a jamais remboursé sa #dette extérieure, ni après la Première, ni après la Seconde Guerre mondiale". Il insiste un peu plus loin, en lançant : "L’Allemagne est le pays qui n’a jamais remboursé ses dettes."

    A l’affirmation "Donc vous nous expliquez que le miracle économique allemand était basé sur la même sorte d’aide que nous refusons à la Grèce aujourd’hui ?", Piketty répond : "Exactement. Nous ne pouvons demander à ce que les nouvelles générations payent pour les erreurs de leurs parents". L’#Europe a été fondée sur le pardon de la dette et l’investissement dans le futur. Pas sur l’idée d’une pénitence infinie. Nous devons nous souvenir de cela. »

    Une dette différent surpasse de loin l’ardoise grecque. Une dette allemande, actuelle, qui s’élève à 157 milliards d’euros, et qui correspond au coût économique des dégâts sanitaires dus aux #pollutions chimiques dans l’#Union_européenne. 157 milliards par an, de frais de santé et de prise en charge de certains troubles, en 10 ans. Ce chiffre a été établi par une équipe d’une vingtaine de chercheurs internationaux, qui le considèrent comme "les externalités négatives", c’est a dire l’impact sanitaire des polluants chimiques. Et sur ces 157 milliards annuels, une grande part incombe à l’Allemagne, avec ses géants du secteur comme #Bayer et #BASF.

    #UE

  • La montée en puissance du système allemand suggère que les États-Unis et l’Allemagne vont au conflit, par Emmanuel Todd (5)
    http://www.les-crises.fr/todd-5-la-montee-en-puissance-du-systeme-allemand-suggere-que-les-etats-u

    Je vais reprendre à ce stade ce concept de science #politique de l’anthropologue belge Pierre van den Berghe : la Herrenvolk democracy , c’est-à-dire la Démocratie du peuple des seigneurs. Ne sautez pas au plafond ! Ces mots ne vont pas faire s’effondrer la Terre – je me suis récemment exprimé dans les mêmes termes dans une interview au journal allemand Die Zeit .

    Au départ, Pierre van den Berghe appliquait ce concept de #démocratie ethnique à l’Afrique du Sud de l’#apartheid, où il existait un corps de citoyens égaux, qui fonctionnait parfaitement bien selon les règles libérales et démocratiques, mais dont la liberté et la démocratie ne tiennent que parce qu’il y a des dominés. De même pour l’Amérique à l’époque de la #ségrégation : l’égalité interne du groupe blanc était assurée par la #domination sur les Indiens, les Noirs… De même, on pourrait catégoriser Israël comme Herrenvolk democracy . Ce qui existe de cohésion et de liberté dans la démocratie israélienne est assuré par l’existence d’une masse ennemie d’Arabes.

    Si je devais décrire l’Europe actuelle, si je devais commenter au niveau politique la carte économique, je dirais que l’Europe, ou l’Empire allemand, commence à prendre la forme générale d’une Herrenvolk democracy avec, en son cœur, une démocratie allemande réservée à ce peuple dominant et, autour, toute une hiérarchie de populations plus ou moins dominées, dont les votes n’ont plus aucune importance. On comprend mieux, pourquoi, dans ce modèle, quand on élit un président en France, il ne se passe rien. Parce qu’il n’a plus de pouvoir ; notamment sur le système monétaire.

    On se retrouve donc avec une démocratie dans laquelle la liberté de la presse, d’opinion, et autres, sont parfaitement respectées ; où il n’y a aucun problème mais où, fondamentalement, la stabilité du système repose sur la solidarité subconsciente à l’intérieur du groupe des dominants. Dans l’Europe qui se dessine, on pourrait voir les Allemands comme les Blancs dans l’Amérique de la ségrégation.