6 ms·
Brazil is currently considering a similar law that would require social networks to compensate content creators for each republication [1]. However, unlike the
by bratao 3y ago
Brazil is currently considering a similar law that would require social networks to compensate content creators for each republication [1]. However, unlike the situation in Canada, the Brazilian lawmakers have taken into account this scenario. The law mandates that social networks cannot cease publishing the content and must negotiate compensation in "fair terms." Personally, I find this approach to be quite perplexing.
[1] Source: https://www.correiobraziliense.com.br/politica/2023/04/5089930-pl-das-fake-news-deputados-querem-obrigar-remuneracao-de-criadores-de-conteudo.html https://www.correiobraziliense.com.br/politica/2023/04/50899...
- amusingimpala75 3y agoSo if I understand correctly, those companies are now going to be forced into paying for products that they cannot just stop using?
- JoshTriplett 3y agoOr fighting a legal battle (which they will hopefully fight and win), or leaving the jurisdiction and then saying "good luck with that, let's find out how much of your companies' revenue we were driving".
- intrasight 3y agoIf they just showed the title and the link - like they used to - they it would drive revenue. But because they show a synopsis of the news, people very often don't click the link.
- amadeuspagel 3y agoThis doesn't happen automatically, it's something websites have to set up: https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/twitter-for-websites/cards/overview/abouts-cards https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/twitter-for-websites/c...
- michaelmior 3y agoI'm skeptical that such explicit summaries are the only thing social networks display. Even if that is currently the case, it would be relatively trivial for a company the size of Meta to generate and show their own summary.
- TimPC 3y agoIt might be technically simple but it’s probably legally complicated to write a summarizer that doesn’t violate copyright. Using data they are explicitly given permission to use by the definition of the field it’s in is quite different though.
- cheriot 3y agoThis is the way it's always worked. News orgs are asking social media companies to display the summary and image https://css-tricks.com/essential-meta-tags-social-media/ https://css-tricks.com/essential-meta-tags-social-media/ They're not generating anything
- cpncrunch 3y agoGoogle News does just show the title.
- intrasight 3y agoNo, it also has the first ~140 characters of the article.
- matheusmoreira 3y ago> good luck with that, let's find out how much of your companies' revenue we were driving I really wish these big techs would do that to Brazil. They made enemies of the current administration when they opposed their censorship laws.
- chaostheory 3y agoSomeone might correct me, but I believe that’s what France did.
- viktorcode 3y agoI think you are right. I vaguely remember French publishers losing revenue after Google News stopped referencing them.
- verdverm 3y agoI recall Google eventually doing a deal with the French publishers. You can find many articles like the following coming out around the same time https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/02/report-google-will-pay-76m-over-three-years-to-link-to-french-news-sites/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/02/report-google-wi...
- daxfohl 3y agoIf they want to operate in the country. Is google going to leave whole countries just because of being required to use and compensate local news? Essentially it's a tariff.
- cheriot 3y agoWho decides what the tariff is?
- Kamq 3y agoThe de facto government.
- SllX 3y agoHonestly? Why not. Not every country in the world is going to pass a law this silly and for those that do, do you really want to be in a business environment where the National government puts you in a position of dictating what services you must also offer in order to continue doing business at all in the country? Like what if Google just decides for whatever reason at some point in the future they don’t want to continue to offer Google News anywhere. That would be their prerogative. Whether they spun it off, sold it or just shut it down are all valid business choices they can make. At least it’s easier in Canada where Google can go “okay, we’ll just remove you from our index that we included you in without charge that if you wanted to, you could have removed yourself from at any time.”
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mrtksn 3y agoSounds like you can print money out of thin air by creating social media accounts who post your "news". It may force the social media companies for proper policing the against fake accounts.
- timbit42 3y agoOnly fake accounts that post news links.
- morkalork 3y agoI demand royalties for my shit posts!
- AnimalMuppet 3y agoThe obvious way to beat that game is to stop carrying Brazilian news before the legislation is passed.
- dragonwriter 3y ago> The law mandates that social networks cannot cease publishing the content So, how does Brazil stop them from withdrawing from Brazil entirely?
- matheusmoreira 3y agoMoney. They will remain here as long as there's still profit to be made. Would be awesome if they had enough balls to tell the brazilian government to go to hell but they just aren't gonna do that as long as they're making money.
- realusername 3y agoThis is the same as increasing taxes then, except that instead of the taxes going to the government to vote for the redistribution, they go straight to news agencies bypassing the government. When viewed with this angle, the next question is why news agencies get their own dedicated taxes and nobody else?
- matheusmoreira 3y agoBecause they're Lula's propaganda machine. Same reason he wants the internet censored with his fake news nonsense.
- realusername 3y agoThat's also what I'm getting from that, making it proportional to the views make it sure that independent investigation journalists won't get any of it.
- caycep 3y agoWould it have been better for these bills (CA/Brazil) to mandate revenue sharing, i.e. no flat fee per link from google, but a percentage of revenue from ads served associated w/ the link?
- philipkglass 3y agoThat would be fair enough but also wouldn't give the publishers what they want, because Google doesn't show ads in their News app or in Google News on the web: https://news.google.com https://news.google.com I just opened it on a browser with no ad blocker and scrolled to the bottom. There are no ads in there. It's all news.
- _aavaa_ 3y ago> “fair terms” The scare quotes are actually warranted here. I’d love to see how you can come to fair terms when the other side know that you cannot walk away.