3 ms·
I'm not sure why HN would be affected, there's no link previews or anything pulled from the article. Links themselves do not seem to be a problem if I understan
by IanCal 8y ago
I'm not sure why HN would be affected, there's no link previews or anything pulled from the article. Links themselves do not seem to be a problem if I understand right:
> This protection does not extend to acts of
hyperlinking which do not constitute communication to the public.
section 33, page 19. http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-593-EN-F1-1.PDF http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016...
- Silhouette 8y agoI'm not sure why HN would be affected It's not the link's address that is the problem under the questionable proposals, but rather the text that describes it. HN's normal custom is to use the original title/headline for that description, and HN's own mods actively change submissions that don't follow that policy. It looks like that could easily get them caught in the same trap as a site like Google that offers accompanying snippets. Maybe YC would be willing to accept the risk of publishers trying to extract money from them, just as running HN itself is a favour to the community, but I see no good reason they should be expected to put up with that risk and any actual costs incurred just to continue providing a useful service that they already generously provide for free.