3 ms·
> And isn't showing the content of the RSS feed "fair use" anyhow? Fair use and copyright are 'artificial' legal constructs, so if they were defined in an 'arb
by throw0101c 3y ago
> And isn't showing the content of the RSS feed "fair use" anyhow?
Fair use and copyright are 'artificial' legal constructs, so if they were defined in an 'arbitrary' way to begin with, they can be redefined to add or remove provisions. These online publishing laws could tweak those provisions.
Also: when an RSS/Atom feed is published, it is still copyrighted, and the terms and conditions would/could perhaps be defined what "fair use" is by copyright holder (maybe?).
- TekMol 3y agoSure, laws are human constructs. But what is the situation in Canada now? Did they really put a law into place which says "When you link to a page with a short excerpt to show what the link is about, this is now a copyright violation"? Wouldn't that also make search engines illegal?
- d0gsg0w00f 3y ago> Wouldn't that also make search engines illegal? Seems like yes. From the article: "The tech giant plans to remove news links from its search engine, Google News and Google Discover for only Canadian publishers and readers."
- robryan 3y agoSeems like this will be much worse for the media companies. It isn't like most people who clicked on news while casually scrolling their feed are suddenly going to start going to all these news sites direct.