4 ms·
The part that gets me is that just linking to a news source is enough to trigger the payments. If the trigger was displaying content from the news source's art
by falcolas 3y ago
The part that gets me is that just linking to a news source is enough to trigger the payments.
If the trigger was displaying content from the news source's articles, that would be one thing. But just linking to a news source? That's a bit too far.
3273.63. (a) (1) "For each month, a covered platform shall track and record ... the total number of the covered platform’s internet websites that link to ..."
- jasonlotito 3y agoIt's not _just_ linking. You can still "just link." You'd have to link AND display the eligible content. "..., display, or present that eligible digital journalism provider’s news articles, works of journalism, or other content, or portions thereof, and that the covered platform has displayed or presented to California residents." The key here being the final piece, which is part of it. That the platform links to and displays the eligible work (news articles, works of journalism, or other content, or portions thereof).
- falcolas 3y agoThat's not how I read it. The "and" is attaching a caveat that the (link|headline|content) has been shown to someone from California; it's restricting the scope of the law to California. In other words, they type of content is collected using "or", and the scope restriction is the "and".
- onetimeusename 3y agoSo in theory, one could start a bogus spam news org, post links to facebook or wherever, and then demand money? Maybe you could get chatGPT to create some plausible sounding news based on other news sources. Then sit back and collect money for doing almost no real work?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- falcolas 3y agoI'd hope it would be harder than that, but... probably not much.