5 ms·

Just to be clear, Google is subject to this law because Google operates and has offices in Spain. It seems reasonable that Google should comply with the laws o

Just to be clear, Google is subject to this law because Google operates and has offices in Spain. It seems reasonable that Google should comply with the laws of where they do business.

RA_Fisher 12y ago
Right, and they are not going to be doing business in Spain.
- rgbrenner 12y ago
  What? Where did you get that. Google news is shutting down. Google is not, and I've heard of no plans to close their Madrid office.
wtbob 12y ago
But the law itself does not seem reasonable. It's a violation of fair use. Lest we forget, Google News links to the articles themselves. It provides a service to news organisations, for—as far as I'm aware—free.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- beberlei 12y ago
  Fair use is an american thing. Spain cannot violate US copyright law
  - icebraining 12y ago
    Not exactly; the concept of fair use exists in the Berne convention, it's not just an American thing. Unfortunately, the convention only allows countries to establish fair use, it doesn't mandate it.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- rancur 12y ago
  > It's a violation of fair use. welcome to the EU. just to warn you, you might find yourself laughing at their patent law, should you read it and applicable case laws
  - pgeorgi 12y ago
    Case law in EU? Only within the former empire, and significant parts of that pretend to be on the way out.
    - rancur 12y ago
      there's been a few patent rulings that are [pretty wtf] contradictory to what the written law states
      - throwawaykf05 12y ago
        I follow US patent law and cases quite a bit, but not so much the EU. Could you provide a few examples?
        rancur 12y ago
        try "criticism of EU patent law" I can't find the original article. It was pretty silly, around 2008 or 2009, the court ruled something basically opposite to the written intent. I think it had to do with a really low barrier to prior-art-baseed-invalidation, but that might have been another weakness
        pgeorgi 12y ago
        The other difference is that common law cares for the written intent, while under civil law judges should seek the underlying intent - which can be opposite to what is written down. One recurring examples I've seen in German law training (but IANAL): two parties agree on the sale of a certain type of fish but use the wrong (Norwegian?) word in the contract. What fish is this contract about? Correct answer: What they meant, not what they wrote down. This might (or might not) be different in common law - but obviously still isn't an issue unless one party brings the contract in front of a judge. As for articles about legal cases: Highly popular cases typically make more sense when you dig into the details (eg. reading the actual decision, not just what some journalist misunderstood the court's abstract to be about). Sometimes they remain puzzling - but I fear that's a feature of all legal systems. And then there's the additional complication that patent cases seem to run under ever-so-slightly different rules to ordinary civil cases, no matter where.
- waps 12y ago
  Uh ? Fair use is (part of) a law. Laws are not subject to fair use. You are subject to laws, and yes, this changes some aspects of the legal concept that is called fair use (quotation rights), and that simply changes fair use. Quoting Spanish news sources should no longer be considered fair use inside of Spain.
  - eru 12y ago
    > Laws are not subject to fair use. Laws can be subject to other laws (and judicial review). But yeah, fair use is an American Thing.
  - eigenvector 12y ago
    The doctrine of fair dealing, which is similar but more restrictive than fair use, exists in several Commonwealth countries: Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa are the ones I know of.
rdlecler1 12y ago
And they are. But will this have the effects the legislators tried to impose. This doesn't get google, it hurts Spain.
- wbillingsley 12y ago
  I hate to break it to you, but Google are not the only game in town. There are plenty of news aggregators (that generate revenue e.g., from advertising), and plenty of places that would be only too happy to step in and be the news-site-of-choice for the customers Google is leaving. Google departing the market will not "hurt Spain" in any meaningful way.
  - Oletros 12y ago
    > There are plenty of news aggregators (that generate revenue e.g., from advertising), and plenty of places that would be only too happy to step in and be the news-site-of-choice for the customers Google is leaving. The consensus in Spain is that this law is very bad for ALL of the aggregators
  - Maken 12y ago
    Of course, there are famous Spanish news aggregators like Menéame, which unlike Google can't abandon the boat and are already considering closing the website or banning any local news source. The "tax" imposed by this law is too big for making any aggregator profitable, and like other similar Spanish "taxes" managed by private entities, the law is so ambigous that you can't even expect to be fined nly once.
gasull 12y ago
Isn't it reasonable that Google decides to stop operations if it doesn't make business sense?

Just to be clear, Google is subject to this law because Google operates and has offices in Spain. It seems reasonable that Google should comply with the laws of where they do business.

RA_Fisher 12y ago

Right, and they are not going to be doing business in Spain.

rgbrenner 12y ago
What? Where did you get that. Google news is shutting down. Google is not, and I've heard of no plans to close their Madrid office.

wtbob 12y ago

But the law itself does not seem reasonable. It's a violation of fair use. Lest we forget, Google News links to the articles themselves. It provides a service to news organisations, for—as far as I'm aware—free.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
beberlei 12y ago
Fair use is an american thing. Spain cannot violate US copyright law
- icebraining 12y ago
  Not exactly; the concept of fair use exists in the Berne convention, it's not just an American thing. Unfortunately, the convention only allows countries to establish fair use, it doesn't mandate it.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
rancur 12y ago
> It's a violation of fair use. welcome to the EU. just to warn you, you might find yourself laughing at their patent law, should you read it and applicable case laws
- pgeorgi 12y ago
  Case law in EU? Only within the former empire, and significant parts of that pretend to be on the way out.
  - rancur 12y ago
    there's been a few patent rulings that are [pretty wtf] contradictory to what the written law states
    - throwawaykf05 12y ago
      I follow US patent law and cases quite a bit, but not so much the EU. Could you provide a few examples?
      - rancur 12y ago
        try "criticism of EU patent law" I can't find the original article. It was pretty silly, around 2008 or 2009, the court ruled something basically opposite to the written intent. I think it had to do with a really low barrier to prior-art-baseed-invalidation, but that might have been another weakness
        pgeorgi 12y ago
        The other difference is that common law cares for the written intent, while under civil law judges should seek the underlying intent - which can be opposite to what is written down. One recurring examples I've seen in German law training (but IANAL): two parties agree on the sale of a certain type of fish but use the wrong (Norwegian?) word in the contract. What fish is this contract about? Correct answer: What they meant, not what they wrote down. This might (or might not) be different in common law - but obviously still isn't an issue unless one party brings the contract in front of a judge. As for articles about legal cases: Highly popular cases typically make more sense when you dig into the details (eg. reading the actual decision, not just what some journalist misunderstood the court's abstract to be about). Sometimes they remain puzzling - but I fear that's a feature of all legal systems. And then there's the additional complication that patent cases seem to run under ever-so-slightly different rules to ordinary civil cases, no matter where.
waps 12y ago
Uh ? Fair use is (part of) a law. Laws are not subject to fair use. You are subject to laws, and yes, this changes some aspects of the legal concept that is called fair use (quotation rights), and that simply changes fair use. Quoting Spanish news sources should no longer be considered fair use inside of Spain.
- eru 12y ago
  > Laws are not subject to fair use. Laws can be subject to other laws (and judicial review). But yeah, fair use is an American Thing.
- eigenvector 12y ago
  The doctrine of fair dealing, which is similar but more restrictive than fair use, exists in several Commonwealth countries: Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa are the ones I know of.

rdlecler1 12y ago

And they are. But will this have the effects the legislators tried to impose. This doesn't get google, it hurts Spain.

wbillingsley 12y ago
I hate to break it to you, but Google are not the only game in town. There are plenty of news aggregators (that generate revenue e.g., from advertising), and plenty of places that would be only too happy to step in and be the news-site-of-choice for the customers Google is leaving. Google departing the market will not "hurt Spain" in any meaningful way.
- Oletros 12y ago
  > There are plenty of news aggregators (that generate revenue e.g., from advertising), and plenty of places that would be only too happy to step in and be the news-site-of-choice for the customers Google is leaving. The consensus in Spain is that this law is very bad for ALL of the aggregators
- Maken 12y ago
  Of course, there are famous Spanish news aggregators like Menéame, which unlike Google can't abandon the boat and are already considering closing the website or banning any local news source. The "tax" imposed by this law is too big for making any aggregator profitable, and like other similar Spanish "taxes" managed by private entities, the law is so ambigous that you can't even expect to be fined nly once.

gasull 12y ago

Isn't it reasonable that Google decides to stop operations if it doesn't make business sense?