Because it’s also stated in the article that: >> The Directive is extremely vague on what defines a "link" or a "news story" and implies that an "excerpt" cons

Because it’s also stated in the article that: >> The Directive is extremely vague on what defines a "link" or a "news story" and implies that an "excerpt" consists of more than one single word from a news-story (many URLs contain more than a single word from the headline). So it is based on the link and also the main point is to force news outlets to get more money for nothing more than a link which drives traffic to them anyways... Okay maybe the most correct definition should be: “search engine link tax” from this specific excerpt but it is also left very vague. What’s is a search engine. Is github a search engine? Are links to news articles on GitHub issues the same fate as on google? So then you go back and think of the potential “search engines” out there and it does start to feel more like a “link tax” because most things can be considered a search engine. //OFFTOPIC: I mean is anything built with full text search a where clause not close to a search engine (in theory)? Lol