If you check Wikipedia's Spanish and Italian editions while in Europe, you'll find yourself facing a wall of text and no means to access its articles. Both pages have gone dark ahead of the European Parliament's final vote on the controversial EU Copyright Directive, which is the first time the region is updating its copyright laws since 2001.
Wikipedia blocked readers from its pages on Tuesday in protest over the future of EU online copyright law.
Critics say the rules, due to be voted on this week, could put an end to memes and remixes, and require platforms to pay for linking to news.
Instead of an encyclopaedia entry, visitors to any page on the Italian language Wikipedia were greeted with a statement about the upcoming vote.
The editors wrote that "Wikipedia itself would be at risk of closing".
"If the proposal is approved, it may be impossible to share a newspaper article on social networks or find it on a search engine," it said.
English-language users of the site were not cut off from its articles - but instead saw a large banner advert urging readers to contact their European representatives, or MEPs, ahead of the vote.
Another unenforceable standard that'll only be used against the ruling power's political enemies. I don't like Wikipedia in general but there's always something to be said for freely available information, so here's to that.
Andrew White
gross
Matthew Cooper
faggots
Grayson Roberts
how does this affect the academic community?
Hunter Fisher
They're gonna shut it down too.
Lucas White
a collection of failed states.
Charles Diaz
Good!
John Reyes
t. the EJew
Connor Johnson
More school papers need to be written with encyclopedia dramatica as the primary source
Evan Clark
Makes zero sense to believe that .gov has the special moral authority to create and enforce such a thing as intellectual property yet cry when they actually put it into force. Statists should at least be consistent.
You know if you memed this hard enough it might become a thing. Problem is meming it to edgy kids/teenagers who will actually use it as a "reputable" source in seriousness.
if they already voted and they voted against, why do they have to vote again? its fucking ridiculous. its so obvious that the jews are pushing this "vote" over and over again until the result is what they want.
thats like having a presidential election and "redoing it" every 2 weeks until the candidate you want wins.
Luke Roberts
It's literally jews jewing jews with a smattering of public interest in the silver linings.
Ethan Wright
oh I probably should have told you, that site might have some nasty spyware on it, but I'm sure a computer expert like yourself should have no problems with that
user, I don't care if you're a purple-headed-SJW-nigger-people-eater, but if you want to shitpost in the kitchen, you best be able to handle the fumes. Jew.
Angel Thomas
oh boy here we go
Austin Roberts
The argument here is basically between powers who want to use it to enforce copyright selectively for political/control reasons and large companies who want to oppose it on purely economic grounds. For the latter group there's a slight incentive to appear to be defending the public interest in the internet as a utility, even if you don't intend to apply your resources in that manner. Don't trust Jewgle, they don't care about a free internet, they just don't want to suffer the costs involved with paying out every time they steal- I mean, "quietly source" some nobody's data. Jews jewing jews.
Oh wow grr ur deliberately acting like an outsider grr omg like grr aw geez grr
Charles Jenkins
I understand your argument enough to find it tiresome. You'll never sell whatever political agenda you want to see happen to normalcattle by shoehorning 'joo' into everything, which is either inaccurate or obsessive and either way not a good rallying cry, and your counterproductive methods may cost us both irreplaceable media. benis shit I never said for a thousand, Alex I said there might be, it acted dodgy. and it was mainly to shut up Jombles Notronbo anyway
>let me keep pushing things into my asshole my 'ur sjw' angle with no evidence because I hope everybody else is as retarded as I am
But it is reputable where else can one learn about the sex move Abe Lincoln
Abe Lincoln - You must be a male in order to perform the Abe Lincoln. One must be careful when performing the Abe Lincoln, as precision with both cock and hand as well as a good poker face are necessary to successfully pull it off. In order to perform the Abe Lincoln, you first convince your partner to shave your balls, or convince her to let you shave her hairy muff. While shaving, and after completion, you must be careful to conceal the fresh shavings in your hand. Next, you fuck her brains out as you please, covertly keeping the fresh pube clippings in your hand and keeping a straight face. When you are approaching orgasm, you must make sure to have the girl on her back. When the baby batter has been sufficiently mixed and is ready to come out, you cum around her jawline and mouth. Before she has a chance to say anything or wipe it off, you throw the fresh shavings onto her unsuspecting visage, creating an Abe Lincoln-esque scruffy beard. If you can jam a concealed top hat onto her head, all the better. This is recommended for first sexual encounters, sexual encounters at her workplace, or sexual encounters in any area where there is no nearby access to water so that the beard cannot be immediately cleaned from her face.
Alternate: Standing and partially squatted in a 69 position, the male wears a top hat eats out the chick (the female's bush is his beard) and proclaims "4 score and 7 years ago!" while taking a shit (freeing the slaves) at the same time.
