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

Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 98 posts

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#21

Post by Verdex »

entuno wrote: post #3

Has the Canadian government exempted articles about the wildfires from fees? If not, they don't really have any right to complain that Facebook doesn't want to pay to share them. At the end of the day, they're a private company who are looking to make a profit, not an emergency broadcast system.

I love rules. But they often get perverted into something terrible and ugly by people who only want to exert power over others.

I love the first order effects. I love the second order effects. I love the weird edge cases.

Then some power hungry sociopath comes into the room and belches "serve me" and vomits a rule onto the ground. It's clear they haven't thought about this any further than simply wanting the masses to bow down to them. Do they even know what rules are?

While I am definitely sympathetic towards anyone who's business model is impacted by Facebook, and I think that the honorable thing for Facebook to do here is take the hit and let sharing of forest fire news, ultimately this is exactly what Canada (a sovereign country ruled by the people) wanted.

This isn't some weird third order emergent property of their rule. They demanded something from Facebook and now they're getting it. If that makes them sad (to get exactly what they asked for) then it's kind of a personal issue.

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#22

Post by benj111 »

What actually is the law?

Is it just embedding an article?

Hyperlinks?

What?

They can't be doing it with hyperlinks surely, or else that would break the web.

Edit: it does apparently include links. But links go the newspapers website, who presumably can monetise how they like, so why would that be an issue?!?

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#23

Post by victorbjorklund »

kennywinker wrote: post #20
davikr wrote: post #7

Good, this is a consequence of pure rent-seeking lobbying from big newspapers. > There have been 52 registered meetings with Ministers, MPs, and senior officials or roughly one meeting every four days since election day nearly 8 months ago. This represents an astonishing level of access and may help explain why the concerns of independent media and the broader public are missing from the bill. [1] [1]: https://www.mi…

Facebook wants to make money off selling ads next to other people’s content. News media wants to get paid for the content they pay to create. Who’s rent seeking again?

So you should be happy now that they are no longer making money off wild fire articles in canada?

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#25

Post by catchnear4321 »

kennywinker wrote: post #20
davikr wrote: post #7

Good, this is a consequence of pure rent-seeking lobbying from big newspapers. > There have been 52 registered meetings with Ministers, MPs, and senior officials or roughly one meeting every four days since election day nearly 8 months ago. This represents an astonishing level of access and may help explain why the concerns of independent media and the broader public are missing from the bill. [1] [1]: https://www.mi…

Facebook wants to make money off selling ads next to other people’s content. News media wants to get paid for the content they pay to create. Who’s rent seeking again?

if information about disasters is “content,” then the correct answer is “everyone.”

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#26

Post by kennywinker »

victorbjorklund wrote: post #23
kennywinker wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook wants to make money off selling ads next to other people’s content. News media wants to get paid for the content they pay to create. Who’s rent seeking again?

So you should be happy now that they are no longer making money off wild fire articles in canada?

Nothing facebook does makes me happy.

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#27

Post by ShrigmaMale »

entuno wrote: post #3

Has the Canadian government exempted articles about the wildfires from fees? If not, they don't really have any right to complain that Facebook doesn't want to pay to share them. At the end of the day, they're a private company who are looking to make a profit, not an emergency broadcast system.

it's so freaking disingenuous when hyperregulatory twerps pass this kind of crap, then wait for a disaster, then soyface at facebook like "see what they're doing!! this is a critical natural disaster tool!" well then maybe yall shouldn't've broken the business model, geniuses. i neither use nor like facebook but this is an obvious mistake.

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#28

Post by andsoitis »

ksaj wrote: post #19

Amazing what greed can do. They want to make money from the news, yet they don't want to pay the news sources for letting them feed off of it. If a Canadian outfit wanted to host news and other media from the US, you know it wouldn't happen without payments in kind to the American news or media outlet.

I'll assume you're writing in good faith, so I will try to explain why I think some are disagreeing with you.

> Amazing what greed can do. They want to make money from the news, yet they don't want to pay the news sources for letting them feed off of it.

The Canadian government has said that a law is going to come into effect that will ban a company like Facebook from allowing news links unless the news provider is compensated. Meta has started to put changes into effect to comply with the rules of the land. The Canadian government is now demanding that an arbitrary exemption is being made. How is a company meant to build systems with such whiplash reactionary legal framework?

> If a Canadian outfit wanted to host news and other media from the US, you know it wouldn't happen without payments in kind to the American news or media outlet. > (Downvoting doesn't make it untrue. Same for the other posts this user is downvoting.)

You are postulating.

Re: Canada demands Meta lift news ban to allow wildfire info sharing

#30

Post by JKCalhoun »

cowsup wrote: post #12
hexo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, at the end of the day, they are SO BIG that they are more like a public place/space, where you cannot really dictate your own rules, even as a owner of such place (for example restaurants is some countries. cell phone network operators.). FB should really cut the bullshit.

> they are SO BIG that they are more like a public place/space, where you cannot really dictate your own rules The Canadian government disagrees. They think Facebook stands to have significant financial gain for the privilege of their users sharing Canadian news sites, to the point where Facebook has to pay a fee for that privilege. You can't simultaneously say "Facebook is a public place, people should be allowed to…

I don't see the quandary. FB has managed to make themselves a defacto public space, they should not however be allowed to extort that position.
Post reply on HN