3 ms·
Presumably he's talking about the intent of the law, which seems to have been to ensure news outlets actually receive money for linked articles. It seems that t
by mattstir 3y ago
Presumably he's talking about the intent of the law, which seems to have been to ensure news outlets actually receive money for linked articles. It seems that the government didn't expect Google or Facebook to just stop linking to Canadian news instead.
Canada appeared to be attempting to emulate countries like Australia, Spain, France, etc that have passed very similar laws. It seems like the tech giants were perfectly happy to just cut ties with Canadian media rather than make a deal however.
- veave 3y agoThe very idea of having to pay to link to something is ridiculous. Imagine if I recommended you to watch a show on Netflix and I had to pay to give that recommendation. It makes absolutely no sense.
- SpeakinTelnet 3y agoIts more like if instead of dropping you to a cinema a bus driver was showing you the full film so that you don't have to enter the cinema and spend money there.
- lolinder 3y agoYour analogy would only make sense if the bill were only trying to tax including all or part of a news article on Facebook/Google. It sounds like instead any link would be taxable, so it would be more like the bus driver having to pay the cinema for the privilege of driving you there.
- SpeakinTelnet 3y ago"Clause 2(2) stipulates that news content is “made available” if two conditions are met: that it, or any portion of it, is reproduced; and that access to it is facilitated by “any means, including an index, aggregation or ranking of news content.” " Just linking does not satisfy the first part of the clause according to the bill.
- lolinder 3y agoEdit: mannerheim points out that OP is quoting from an outdated version of the bill, and the final version is much worse. I'm going to leave my original reply because I think my objection is also valid, but mannerheim's point is more important: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37029066 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37029066 --- I think that's ambiguous enough to be problematic. For example, does a slug (headline-with-hyphens-in-it) count? If so, links often do. What about the headline? And what if a user copies a paragraph into their post? "Any portion" is language that gives away that this is intended to be read pretty broadly. There's no qualifier, no "significant" or "substantial". If the goal were to prevent the kind of abuse that your bus driver analogy suggests, they should have been more specific.
- mannerheim 3y agoI see an 'or', not an 'and'. 'Making available of news content (2) For the purposes of this Act, news content is made available if (a) the news content, or any portion of it, is reproduced; or (b) access to the news content, or any portion of it, is facilitated by any means, including an index, aggregation or ranking of news content.' https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44-1/bill/C-18/royal-assent https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44-1/bill/C-18/royal-a...
- SpeakinTelnet 3y agoThere's definitely a discrepancy in the various documents https://lop.parl.ca/staticfiles/PublicWebsite/Home/ResearchPublications/LegislativeSummaries/PDF/44-1/44-1-C18-E.pdf https://lop.parl.ca/staticfiles/PublicWebsite/Home/ResearchP...
- mannerheim 3y agoYour link is October 2022. Mine is the final version that was assented to on June 22, 2023.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 3y ago