4 ms·
Literally ANY content delivery network would be able to compete with google. AMP sites are sites that the companies themselves build for google(could be any cdn
by realmod 6y ago
Literally ANY content delivery network would be able to compete with google. AMP sites are sites that the companies themselves build for google(could be any cdn) to just cache.
The news organizations themselves gains a lot from google crawling and indexing their sites (which do cost google money) and now this legislation would also require google to pay them for displaying the title/subtitle of their articles. In what world is that fair or balancing out the relationship?
- Spivak 6y ago> would also require google to pay them for displaying the title/subtitle of their articles. In what world is that fair or balancing out the relationship? This is not what the legislation is about. This is about Google's practice of excerpting the actual content of the articles and putting it at the top of the page. Google is algorithmically republishing copyrighted content from these news orgs and hoping that surrounding it in quotes is enough to protect them.
- sidibe 6y agoYou are ignoring that whether the snippets are shown is already entirely up to the news orgs. In fact I think they're the ones that decide what's in the snippets
- brokenmachine 6y agoSo the news sites can add a single "*" to their robots.txt. Problem solved.