What changes for Creatives?
In my opinion, nothing. This law, unlike the American copyright act, does not protect the small players, but only the publishers who will be able to find what they consider more advantageous agreements with Google and Facebook. However, in practice, they are, in my view, self-excluding from the web, perhaps hoping for our return to print, which would be like going back to the river or the neighborhood fountain to wash clothes instead of using a washing machine. Behind the promise that journalists will receive part of the compensation, obviously few of them have noticed what happened in Spain in 2014 (where Google shut down the service) with Google News and in Germany, for a similar attempt to ask Big G for money for something that it actually charges other entities for (placement and visibility).
Copyright for Memes and Gifs
An important aspect of the directive concerns Memes and Gifs. The regulation specifies and requires member states to protect the freedoms to upload and share works for the purposes of quotation, criticism, review, caricature, or parody. In practice, we should be able to continue creating and sharing newspaper clippings, memes, and everything as before, and perhaps even more than before, as the directive now provides the right to do so.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN?
In conclusion, publishers have lobbied to pass a directive that will, in practice, accelerate their disappearance. The press in the last decade has always followed the web, losing quality and editorial control. It is often a victim of fake news that it reports without verification. Newspaper sales have declined, not because of Google News, but because we users find better options elsewhere. The same applies to mainstream TV, which succumbs to Netflix and similar services. The press is a victim of itself, not of new technologies; today it is merely a megaphone for propaganda, lacking professionalism and no longer verifying sources.