111–120 of 181 posts
What's stopping Google from refusing to pay the news sites, thus de-indexing them from Google entirely? If the relationship is "pay me for my content", then refusing to serve links to their media is absolutely within their rights. Only the publishers have something to lose here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it could be even easier than it was. there's no reason someone couldn't make a small bit of desktop software which, fed AWS/Azure/GCP/DO/github pages/etc credentials, set up every aspect of a website, and automatically synced some local directory of content to the relevant site.
>there's no reason someone couldn't make a small bit of desktop software which, fed AWS/Azure/GCP/DO/ The gp (notatoad) mentioned technical skill as a barrier and you responded to that point but easy-to-use idiot-proof software isn't really the issue. The bigger problem(s) mega-sites like Youtube solves is financial . When one uploads a video to Youtube, it doesn't matter if it gets 0 views or 1 billion views. The co…
Peer-to-peer distribution systems like BitTorrent, IPFS, and Dat are a good solution to this; distribution actually gets easier and cheaper as demand for a file increases.
I think the author has a good grasp of the situation that is more important than the average person understands. Murdoch knows his empire is waning and is attempting to ingratiate himself to government officials by becoming an unofficial mouthpiece of several conservative governments. His coup d'etat would be if he is able to turn that relationship official in some regions, pass laws to make his content mandatory to…
> His coup d'etat would be if he is able to turn that relationship official in some regions “In Germany, a comparable anti-snippet law was rendered powerless by a group of publishers who did the math and offered their content for free in exchange for the usual stream of clicks sent back to them” [1]. In summary, this law has made having access to Google more valuable. [1] https://mondaynote.com/the-media-industry-and…
Article 13 states that the measures to seek rightholder approval for user-submitted content "shall be effective and proportionate, taking into account, among other factors" the nature and size of services, whether they're a small and medium business, the sheer volume of material uploaded, and the cost burden of such an effort.
Furthermore, it refers to a precise definition of the sort of enterprise that is to be impacted by this regime -- those that provide "public access to a large amount of works or other subject-matter uploaded by its users which it organises and promotes for profit-making purposes", exempting a variety of others. This leaves ample leeway to require a more rigorous scheme from hosts as big as YouTube while being more lenient with a hobbyist forum.
Article 11 states that the copyright protection of journalistic articles from aggregators will expire at the end of the following year from the article's publication. It reaffirms the right of publishers to decide how they wish to profit from their work -- if they choose to make it available for the aggregator at no cost, that is their right as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure you'll be able to fill out a form and get an email a day later, "We're sorry, we've reviewed your case but have decided against you (because we have no reason to ever take any risk)" The DMCA is a shining example of just how well these appeals processes work...
I don't think that would satisfy the requirements of the directive: > Any complaint filed under such mechanisms shall be processed without undue delay and be subject to human review. Right holders shall reasonably justify their decisions to avoid arbitrary dismissal of complaints. It also requires Member States to ensure "that users have access to an independent body for the resolution of disputes as well as to a cou…
From the company’s perspective, it’s like a DDoS attack that is illegal to defend yourself against.
I think if pressure from "traditional" publishers keeps going, google is going to put plan B in action and go on to actually own the news as well. It's not hard for them to build an "uber for news" for journalists, editors and the common man, as in fact they have been subsidizing the open web with adsense for decades anyway. Maybe the next google reader will be about google's own news.
The problem with that plan is that if Google were to release such a service in the EU, the EU would then fine Google for using their search monopoly to prop up a service in another industry (News). The EU did something similar when Google used their search monopoly to promote Google Shopping. EU is gonna EU.
I'm a lot less worried about the "link tax" clauses than the copyright liability clause. Not because the link tax is a good idea but because it's a spectacular own goal that is mainly going to hurt the idiots who lobbied for it. Giving companies direct liability for policing copyright in user-uploaded content is a much bigger disaster, on two separate fronts, both highly damaging: 1) Implementing youtube-style conten…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 1) Implementing youtube-style content id will be a huge burden for small companies. I will be extremely surprised if that will be required from small companies, considering the directive expressly says that "special account shall be taken of [...] ensuring that the burden on SMEs remains appropriate and that automated blocking of content is avoided." (SME = Small and medium-sized enterprises) There is also no langu…
and i am sure the properly-greased hand will ascertain that the right businesses get classified as "SME" and the wrong ones do not ;)
"The category of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is made up of enterprises which employ fewer than 250 persons and which have an annual turnover not exceeding 50 million euro, and/or an annual balance sheet total not exceeding 43 million euro."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
and i am sure the properly-greased hand will ascertain that the right businesses get classified as "SME" and the wrong ones do not ;)
Nope, the EU has a formal definition of a SME: "The category of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is made up of enterprises which employ fewer than 250 persons and which have an annual turnover not exceeding 50 million euro, and/or an annual balance sheet total not exceeding 43 million euro."
[1] https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publi...
The very idea that the aggregator (Google) should pay the advertisers (news sites) for directing traffic to them is just patently absurd. By common sense, it should be the other way around. Sadly, the traditional media has a massive conflict of interest here, so the issue passed at least in my part of EU with little to no ado. But once the member states start enacting the directive to legislation, the manure will sur…
The problem though is not that aggregators link to the news articles, but the concern of them containing so much And if Google are making a profit by bringing eyeballs to their site using other people's content, shouldn't it be up to the people who created that content to choose how to negotiate that? They're free to let Google take the content for free / pay Google to take the content if they want, unless there's so…