4 ms·

I can't understand the support for this scheme among readers here. As I understand it (correct me if I'm wrong) The AUS government passed a law aimed at a maki

I can't understand the support for this scheme among readers here. As I understand it (correct me if I'm wrong) The AUS government passed a law aimed at a making a specific search engine pay other private entities for including links to them among its results. Seems nuts! Of course Google has to decide to either comply or pull out of the market, that's always their right.

nix23 6y ago
>The AUS government passed a law aimed at a making a specific search engine pay other private entities for including links to them among its results. True and i as Google would just say, hey if you want your link in our Australian search-result you have to pay upfront. Problem solved. If Australia has, for some time just white pages then the peoples will probably do something about it...in the meantime google get a butt-load of money, and Australia looses allot of it.
- rognjen 6y ago
  And the AUS government can would then say "You're in breach of this code, billions please."
  - nix23 6y ago
    Why? You then don't show any links (or any results at all), and even funnier the Australian new-outlets now have to pay too be even found. And maybe just maybe Australia makes his own search-engine (which would be a good thing)
    - squiggleblaz 6y ago
      Who in Australia couldn't name at least one of Rupert Murdoch's news websites? No one needs to use Google to find their front pages. This will be an own goal, but even as it backfires it will help Murdoch since it will make it much harder for a new news media site to get established. Ftr, this law is by and for Rupert Murdoch.
      - nix23 6y ago
        And the protest is showing blank search-pages until Murdoch pays for it's own links...the rest is the Australian peoples problem.
    - rognjen 6y ago
      > Why? Because that's what the proposed law says the government would do.
      - nix23 6y ago
        ...You then don't show any links (or any results at all)
onion2k 6y ago
The AUS government passed a law aimed at a making a specific search engine pay other private entities for including links to them among its results. Seems nuts! I believe what the law actually says is that Google should to pay news providers when it displays content from their websites in search listings - eg when you search for a topic in the news and Google highlights some articles in the "Top Stories" section at the top of the results. The contention is that those links provide very little value to the news site and a heap of value to Google. If that is really the case then there's no reason why Google should get to access and display that data for free. The point of search engines being able to index a site and display the link alongside adverts has always been that it's a mutually beneficial relationship - the site gets traffic, and Google gets sites to show ads next to. If people are no longer using Google to go to websites then that value proposition changes, and having your website in Google's index is no longer a benefit. If that's true then it's not unreasonable for site owners to suggest they should be paid for the 'raw materials' that Google makes money from. There is an argument that news sites could put up a robots.txt site to block Google, but that's a bit like saying burglary is OK if a house owner hasn't locked their doors...
- avsteele 6y ago
  Thanks for the additional info. Can't agree with your analogy though, that just isn't how the web functions. Seems like a pretty clear business-to-business issue that should in no way involve the gov.
- PeterisP 6y ago
  If the news sites honestly assert "that those links provide very little value to the news site and a heap of value to Google" then they can't really object if Google and Facebook stops providing these links. As they are objecting, then it seems that this assertion wasn't really true and that their bluff got called.
  - stephen_g 6y ago
    Exactly, and the fact that they hadn’t exercised their power by blocking Google with robots.txt to try and bring them to the table was a huge indicator that maybe they weren’t being honest. What they were saying was absolutely ludicrous. Somebody from News Ltd. said with a straight face that Google probably owes them $1bn a year - a full quarter of all Google’s Australian revenue across all their products! Either they’re crazy liars, or seriously extremely deluded as to how important their news results are to Google’s revenue...

nix23 6y ago

>The AUS government passed a law aimed at a making a specific search engine pay other private entities for including links to them among its results. True and i as Google would just say, hey if you want your link in our Australian search-result you have to pay upfront. Problem solved. If Australia has, for some time just white pages then the peoples will probably do something about it...in the meantime google get a butt-load of money, and Australia looses allot of it.

rognjen 6y ago
And the AUS government can would then say "You're in breach of this code, billions please."
- nix23 6y ago
  Why? You then don't show any links (or any results at all), and even funnier the Australian new-outlets now have to pay too be even found. And maybe just maybe Australia makes his own search-engine (which would be a good thing)
  - squiggleblaz 6y ago
    Who in Australia couldn't name at least one of Rupert Murdoch's news websites? No one needs to use Google to find their front pages. This will be an own goal, but even as it backfires it will help Murdoch since it will make it much harder for a new news media site to get established. Ftr, this law is by and for Rupert Murdoch.
    - nix23 6y ago
      And the protest is showing blank search-pages until Murdoch pays for it's own links...the rest is the Australian peoples problem.
  - rognjen 6y ago
    > Why? Because that's what the proposed law says the government would do.
    - nix23 6y ago
      ...You then don't show any links (or any results at all)

onion2k 6y ago

The AUS government passed a law aimed at a making a specific search engine pay other private entities for including links to them among its results. Seems nuts! I believe what the law actually says is that Google should to pay news providers when it displays content from their websites in search listings - eg when you search for a topic in the news and Google highlights some articles in the "Top Stories" section at the top of the results. The contention is that those links provide very little value to the news site and a heap of value to Google. If that is really the case then there's no reason why Google should get to access and display that data for free. The point of search engines being able to index a site and display the link alongside adverts has always been that it's a mutually beneficial relationship - the site gets traffic, and Google gets sites to show ads next to. If people are no longer using Google to go to websites then that value proposition changes, and having your website in Google's index is no longer a benefit. If that's true then it's not unreasonable for site owners to suggest they should be paid for the 'raw materials' that Google makes money from. There is an argument that news sites could put up a robots.txt site to block Google, but that's a bit like saying burglary is OK if a house owner hasn't locked their doors...

avsteele 6y ago
Thanks for the additional info. Can't agree with your analogy though, that just isn't how the web functions. Seems like a pretty clear business-to-business issue that should in no way involve the gov.
PeterisP 6y ago
If the news sites honestly assert "that those links provide very little value to the news site and a heap of value to Google" then they can't really object if Google and Facebook stops providing these links. As they are objecting, then it seems that this assertion wasn't really true and that their bluff got called.
- stephen_g 6y ago
  Exactly, and the fact that they hadn’t exercised their power by blocking Google with robots.txt to try and bring them to the table was a huge indicator that maybe they weren’t being honest. What they were saying was absolutely ludicrous. Somebody from News Ltd. said with a straight face that Google probably owes them $1bn a year - a full quarter of all Google’s Australian revenue across all their products! Either they’re crazy liars, or seriously extremely deluded as to how important their news results are to Google’s revenue...