Through this law, platforms will move from being intermediaries to being responsible for the content existing in their systems. Therefore, the platforms should protect the persons or entities that own copyright, and cannot allow the upload or issue directly content that infringes these rights. Those who do not take it into account may be punished with the penalty of law.

The law has its advantages and disadvantages. For whom is it harmful? In the short term for big platforms, they lose power to drive their business model. In the short term, even for those people who have created their own lives within the platforms and around these contents. In the medium term, for all, as algorithmic censorship develops.

Who benefits from this law? In the short term, for content owners, often non-authors. Perhaps because over time they can explore ways to promote new business models for their authors.

Could we achieve the same result without developing algorithmic censorship and without harming these entrepreneurs by using their way of life today with the content of others?

I'm not an algorithm expert, but if you can do algorithmic censorship, why not develop algorithmic payment? I have heard this idea many times from Jarom Lanier. That it should be big platforms that have to pay, because they are the ones that benefit most from their content.