3 ms·

> Also I haven't figured out yet what part of the law actually would imply that Facebook needs to blackout news wholesale. As I read it the law merely requires

by jsnell 6y ago

> Also I haven't figured out yet what part of the law actually would imply that Facebook needs to blackout news wholesale. As I read it the law merely requires that Facebook negotiate with each publisher. A negotiation is something that ends up with mutually agreeable terms, or no deal. That's not the case here. The news companies do not need to negotiate in good faith, they are allowed to force the tech companies into binding arbitration. The arbitration will of course be done by people in the pockets of the news companies. It's legally mandated that what is considered is the cost of producing news and the benefit that the tech companies get from news. The inverse of the benefit for the news companies and the costs for the tech companies are not to be considered. Oh, and that no deal option you'd usually have? Not in this "negotation". If the tech companies serve any news from any source, including non-Australian sources, they're at the mercy of any qualifying news org that wants to fleece them in this kangaroo arbitration.

ocdtrekkie 6y ago
It's funny this is happening to Google and Facebook, two companies who have forced their take-it-or-leave-it "negotiations" on over a billion users each. They're monopolies, and the amount of power and leverage they have and exploit is insane. Their EULAs are literally a non-negotiable "agree if you want to exist on the Internet". Do not try to make us feel bad for these companies that someone is also going to do it to them too.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
  Have Facebook or Google compelled you to use their services? If not, then there is no parallel. It is not about "feeling bad" for companies or not. It's about whether the policy is sound.
  - Barrin92 6y ago
    I have certainly been compelled to use both, Facebook for vital student groups during my time in university (it's also in many developing countries the only digital place to run a business), and Google for similar reasons, including a work account. There's DDG now for search I suppose but Google used to be the only player in town. Technically if I had to avoid Google I couldn't use Uber because it depends on Google maps, I couldn't use websites using Google cloud, etc.. In terms of function they certainly compel people to use them because they've been so integrated into infrastructure. You cannot avoid them.
    - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
      Facebook for vital student groups during my time in university I.e. your colleagues compelled you to use Facebook. (it's also in many developing countries the only digital place to run a business), I doubt very much there is any such country, but even if so, it's not a compulsion. and Google for similar reasons, including a work account Your workplace compelled you to use Google. There's DDG now for search I suppose Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, Baidu . . . but Google used to be the only player in town. There was never any such time. Technically if I had to avoid Google I couldn't use Uber because it depends on Google maps It is still your choice to use Uber or not. You could use Lyft, hail a cab, drive yourself, walk, ride a bike . . . Google Cloud I don't see this as you using Google, but rather you using someone who uses Google. This just isn't something you have any reasonable expectation of control over. There is nothing wrong with Google providing a service that some businesses choose to use, who you happen to also do business with.

by jsnell 6y ago

ocdtrekkie 6y ago

It's funny this is happening to Google and Facebook, two companies who have forced their take-it-or-leave-it "negotiations" on over a billion users each. They're monopolies, and the amount of power and leverage they have and exploit is insane. Their EULAs are literally a non-negotiable "agree if you want to exist on the Internet". Do not try to make us feel bad for these companies that someone is also going to do it to them too.

asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
Have Facebook or Google compelled you to use their services? If not, then there is no parallel. It is not about "feeling bad" for companies or not. It's about whether the policy is sound.
- Barrin92 6y ago
  I have certainly been compelled to use both, Facebook for vital student groups during my time in university (it's also in many developing countries the only digital place to run a business), and Google for similar reasons, including a work account. There's DDG now for search I suppose but Google used to be the only player in town. Technically if I had to avoid Google I couldn't use Uber because it depends on Google maps, I couldn't use websites using Google cloud, etc.. In terms of function they certainly compel people to use them because they've been so integrated into infrastructure. You cannot avoid them.
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
    Facebook for vital student groups during my time in university I.e. your colleagues compelled you to use Facebook. (it's also in many developing countries the only digital place to run a business), I doubt very much there is any such country, but even if so, it's not a compulsion. and Google for similar reasons, including a work account Your workplace compelled you to use Google. There's DDG now for search I suppose Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, Baidu . . . but Google used to be the only player in town. There was never any such time. Technically if I had to avoid Google I couldn't use Uber because it depends on Google maps It is still your choice to use Uber or not. You could use Lyft, hail a cab, drive yourself, walk, ride a bike . . . Google Cloud I don't see this as you using Google, but rather you using someone who uses Google. This just isn't something you have any reasonable expectation of control over. There is nothing wrong with Google providing a service that some businesses choose to use, who you happen to also do business with.