Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 124 posts

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#11

Post by viraptor »

FriendlyNormie wrote: post #2

If I repeatedly linked to my own site with a title that interested you but all you could see on my page was an unskippable ad demanding that you sign up and pay for my unrelated product, wouldn’t my site be banned from HN? Why do sites like nytimes get a free pass with their paywalls?

I don't pay for this site, but can see the full article just fine. I don't know what the rules are exactly, but some of us do have access (and ublock takes care of ads)

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#12

Post by nogabebop23 »

All of these NYT stories bring up a blocking modal dialog requiring me to log in or create an account (I guess this is a slight improvement from making me pay). Is this the same for everyone else? Why do other sites that show a dismissable overlay get raked over the coals as if they are criminals?

What value is there in posting a link on HN if it's behind a pay (or temporarily free) wall? This goes double for the WSJ. Let's not debate business models here, but asking what's the intent/requirements, and why the double standard?

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#14

Post by re-actor »

nogabebop23 wrote: post #12

All of these NYT stories bring up a blocking modal dialog requiring me to log in or create an account (I guess this is a slight improvement from making me pay). Is this the same for everyone else? Why do other sites that show a dismissable overlay get raked over the coals as if they are criminals? What value is there in posting a link on HN if it's behind a pay (or temporarily free) wall? This goes double for the WSJ…

Clear your cookies

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#15

Post by nogabebop23 »

viraptor wrote: post #11
FriendlyNormie wrote: post #2

If I repeatedly linked to my own site with a title that interested you but all you could see on my page was an unskippable ad demanding that you sign up and pay for my unrelated product, wouldn’t my site be banned from HN? Why do sites like nytimes get a free pass with their paywalls?

I don't pay for this site, but can see the full article just fine. I don't know what the rules are exactly, but some of us do have access (and ublock takes care of ads)

what browser, etc are you using? I'm on FF with uBlock in Canada and always get the NYT's own login/subscribe overlay that while not an ad is essentially a redirect to a login or register page.

I guess it works though; I'm not about to sign up to the NYT or WSJ and I don't even bother clicking their links, so mission accomplished!

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#16

Post by boomboomsubban »

nogabebop23 wrote: post #12

All of these NYT stories bring up a blocking modal dialog requiring me to log in or create an account (I guess this is a slight improvement from making me pay). Is this the same for everyone else? Why do other sites that show a dismissable overlay get raked over the coals as if they are criminals? What value is there in posting a link on HN if it's behind a pay (or temporarily free) wall? This goes double for the WSJ…

There is no rule against pay walled content, and most NYT stories have numerous people complaining about it. The NYT and WSJ posts still get votes because they're large enough that many people are subscribers, and their paywalls are trivial to bypass.

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#17

Post by tomhoward »

nogabebop23 wrote: post #12

All of these NYT stories bring up a blocking modal dialog requiring me to log in or create an account (I guess this is a slight improvement from making me pay). Is this the same for everyone else? Why do other sites that show a dismissable overlay get raked over the coals as if they are criminals? What value is there in posting a link on HN if it's behind a pay (or temporarily free) wall? This goes double for the WSJ…

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22693084

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#19

Post by yodon »

Igelau wrote: post #8
FriendlyNormie wrote: post #2

If I repeatedly linked to my own site with a title that interested you but all you could see on my page was an unskippable ad demanding that you sign up and pay for my unrelated product, wouldn’t my site be banned from HN? Why do sites like nytimes get a free pass with their paywalls?

[flagged]

Count the number of unicorns ycombinator has invested in and compare those returns to the returns that could be generated by trying to secretly take payment from advertisers. Why would ycombinator waste even a single minute of a single employees time on such an unprofitable activity when it could instead have that same employee spend that same time helping to find and grow the next unicorn. No one is getting rich selling ad space on their own website. Pg is more than smart enough to know this.

Re: The ‘Blurred Lines’ case scared songwriters, but its time may be up

#20

Post by dangus »

nogabebop23 wrote: post #12

All of these NYT stories bring up a blocking modal dialog requiring me to log in or create an account (I guess this is a slight improvement from making me pay). Is this the same for everyone else? Why do other sites that show a dismissable overlay get raked over the coals as if they are criminals? What value is there in posting a link on HN if it's behind a pay (or temporarily free) wall? This goes double for the WSJ…

If you’re paywalled on NYT you’ve already viewed many articles.

You can clear your cookies or you might be interested in subscribing since you seem to enjoy their content.

Post reply on HN