Could someone summarize both positions? It seems pretty reasonable to me - my understanding is that Australia wants Google and Facebook to pay lump sums to have their content on their platforms (as opposed to per-click). Google and Facebook can basically say yes or no. How is this different than, say, The New York Times saying the same thing about their content?
Because it is at odds with the grand idea of a beautiful open network and free flow of information^W^W^W^W^W^W^W^W US-centric media machine governed by US law and exclusively celebrating US culture and western propaganda You are likely to find all kinds of explanations on this thread, but ultimately I believe the root cause is the above.
Please don't take HN threads further into nationalistic or ideological flamewar. It makes discussion less curious, more tedious, and nastier. Instead, please make your substantive points thoughtfully and without that.
