31–40 of 156 posts
Belgian papers sued Google a few years ago over similar uses of their content. It sort of backfired on them when google stopped crawling their pages. The internet and Google are more powerful than the German print media. http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2011/07/18/belgian-papers-a...
Ok, ok, also a little bit of schadenfreude.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course the quality and quantity of German news on Google would worsen, but the point would be to see if it is Google benefiting more from the newspapers, or the other way around.
It would be interesting to see an official statistic from the big papers where they get their traffic from. I get my news by surfing directly to their homepages. I think I read somewhere that they get most of their hits through the google search although I cant really belive that.
I think the rest of the traffic historical articles, looked up by people trying to win arguments on the internet. I don't know how many times i've been pulled to the NYT because of that sort of behavior. I would guess all of that traffic comes from google.
Belgian papers sued Google a few years ago over similar uses of their content. It sort of backfired on them when google stopped crawling their pages. The internet and Google are more powerful than the German print media. http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2011/07/18/belgian-papers-a...
What a great article. So brief, yet so much justice. Ok, ok, also a little bit of schadenfreude.
I suggest the "careful what you wish for" lesson applies both ways. "Justice" implies that Google can and should get away with a lot of things under threat of removing your content from their index.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a great article. So brief, yet so much justice. Ok, ok, also a little bit of schadenfreude.
>so much justice I suggest the "careful what you wish for" lesson applies both ways. "Justice" implies that Google can and should get away with a lot of things under threat of removing your content from their index.
As this site is nearly down, I add my thoughts as a comment here as well: Well, some media (FAZ) did a pretty good job, letting Frank Rieger explain the "Leistungsschutzrecht". OK, even there, it was one article of many. And only one. And what is new, when it comes to the press not publishing anything, that goes against their own agenda. Even across a lot of publishing-houses. Well nothing new under the sun. What is…
The law is good because Google can afford to pay and the hordes of blogspammers can't.
Therefore Germany will be the first country without blogspam.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a great article. So brief, yet so much justice. Ok, ok, also a little bit of schadenfreude.
>so much justice I suggest the "careful what you wish for" lesson applies both ways. "Justice" implies that Google can and should get away with a lot of things under threat of removing your content from their index.
Interesting and sad. I don't know if it is possible but I am wondering if such a law could include an 'opt out' policy. Something which said to search engines and the like that they are allowed to snippet your articles. Then have Google turn off indexing of everything that doesn't have opt-out enabled. My expectation would be that the opt-out publications would flourish and the ones who had opted "in" would quickly d…