4 ms·
This tax applies only to Google. It doesn't apply to any other tech company, and it never will. The DMA at least provides more-or-less objective criteria for wh
by bloppe 3y ago
This tax applies only to Google. It doesn't apply to any other tech company, and it never will. The DMA at least provides more-or-less objective criteria for what constitutes a "gatekeeper", but this is literally a private deal between Canada and Google.
I don't have a problem with publishers getting a greater share of ad revenue, but there are better ways to do it. The govt could increase taxes on ad exchanges categorically (still effectively a tax on Google and Facebook) and give publishers tax breaks. That would have the same effect but be way more reasonable.
- ikidd 3y agoIt applied to Facebook/Meta and any larger social media sites. Meta just shut it down and any direct contributions to journalism that they were making, and now the publishers are crying because their traffic has plummetted, to the surprise of precisely nobody except them. Not sure where you're getting your information.
- jeffbee 3y agoThe proposed California law applies only to sites with 1 billion MAU and sales or market cap over $550 billion. It only applies to Alphabet and Meta.
- bloppe 3y agoI'm talking about the Guardian article in the grandparent comment. It's a private deal between Google and the Canadian govt.
- LegitShady 3y agoThere is no such thing as a private deal with the government that is extorting you for money to give to legacy media companies. It's like calling armed robbery by a cop under official orders by the president a private deal. Not a thing.