4 ms·

> After a law was passed requiring all search engines to pay newspapers for using "small sections of text", Google gave newspapers two alternatives: Either they

by Oletros 12y ago

> After a law was passed requiring all search engines to pay newspapers for using "small sections of text", Google gave newspapers two alternatives: Either they gave Google perpetual, royalty-free access to all their content, or they would be removed from search results Source for that?

amatriain 12y ago
It's been widely discussed http://www.dw.de/german-publishers-vs-google/a-18030444 http://www.dw.de/german-publishers-vs-google/a-18030444 http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/05/us-google-axel-sprngr-idUSKBN0IP1YT20141105 http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/05/us-google-axel-spr... In the end german newspapers gave Google permission to use snippets of content without paying any royalties. They needed Google News traffic more than Google needed them. Which is the reason why spanish lawmakers made a similar law but with a mandatory royalties clause. Spanish newspapers cannot give an exemption to any company, under the law paying royalties for using snippets is mandatory regardless of the content owner wishes. This law is not currently being enforced, but the consequences are dramatic all the same: Google has shut down Google News Spain, and other content aggregators are under threat of being hit with fines at any moment. And that's why I'm not currently allowing feedbunch.com users to subscribe to RSS feeds from spanish newspaper publishers, until the situation changes. Anti-monopoly legislation is fine, but sometimes it can be a hammer that the big players use to hit each other instead of a tool to help new players get in the market.
- Oletros 12y ago
  Yes, I know that the law was passed. What I asked for was about the claim about the ultimatum Google offered to publishers
  - amatriain 12y ago
    This is the best link I've found with a quick search http://the-digital-reader.com/2014/10/22/german-publishers-cave-grant-google-free-permission-use-snippets-search-results/ http://the-digital-reader.com/2014/10/22/german-publishers-c...
    - Oletros 12y ago
      But is still the same, this link doesn't talk about Google given any ultimatum to publishers.
      - amatriain 12y ago
        Germany passed a law intending to make Google pay for using news snippets. Google simply stopped including snippets from german newspapers. German newspapers reluctantly gave an exemption to Google so that it would publish snippets from their websites again. What more evidence do you need? Perhaps only a letter written in blood and signed "give us an exemption or else" accompanied with a horse head would convince you about Google's negotiation tactics here?
        Oletros 12y ago
        > What more evidence do you need? What evidence? An evidence that it is not a law that forbids putting snippets,. The ones doping ultimatum were the German government and the publishers > Perhaps only a letter written in blood and signed "give us an exemption or else" accompanied with a horse head would convince you about Google's negotiation tactics here? Perhaps not the bend of reality that you're doing I suppose that you also think that in the Spanish case the one doing an ultimatum is also google.
probably_wrong 12y ago
I wrote a similar comment once[1], check those that replied to me. Also, here's an article from Reuters[2] with some details. I'm on mobile, so sorry I can't provide better sources. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8667309 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8667309 [2] http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0IP1YT20141105?irpc=932 http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0IP1YT20141105?irpc...
- Oletros 12y ago
  Those links doesn't support your claim about "Google gave newspapers two alternatives: Either they gave Google perpetual, royalty-free access to all their content, or they would be removed from search results" What Google did was what the law required. And, by the way, nothing of royalty-free access to all of the content
  - probably_wrong 12y ago
    Here's an extract from the German Wikipedia: "Before the [law] came into force on 1 August 2013, Google Germany had written to the press publishers in June 2013. They should tell Google whether they waive all rights under the law on Google News and grant [it] free license. Otherwise, their content would no longer be listed from 1 August in Google News" [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leistungsschutzrecht_f%C3%BCr_Presseverleger https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leistungsschutzrecht_f%C3%BCr_...
    - Oletros 12y ago
      From your quote: > "they waive all rights under the law" Really, stop, what you're linking is what the German law says, there is no ultimatum from Google. Google asked the publishers if they will give the right to publish the snippets without paying or not, nothing less, nothing more. Just what the German law was
      - Dylan16807 12y ago
        What exactly are you objecting to here? "Either you do X or we shut down Y" is an ultimatum. Are you confusing ultimatims with blackmail? It doesn't have to be phrased as a demand. As a friendly opportunity it's still an ultimatum.

by Oletros 12y ago

amatriain 12y ago

It's been widely discussed http://www.dw.de/german-publishers-vs-google/a-18030444 http://www.dw.de/german-publishers-vs-google/a-18030444 http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/05/us-google-axel-sprngr-idUSKBN0IP1YT20141105 http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/05/us-google-axel-spr... In the end german newspapers gave Google permission to use snippets of content without paying any royalties. They needed Google News traffic more than Google needed them. Which is the reason why spanish lawmakers made a similar law but with a mandatory royalties clause. Spanish newspapers cannot give an exemption to any company, under the law paying royalties for using snippets is mandatory regardless of the content owner wishes. This law is not currently being enforced, but the consequences are dramatic all the same: Google has shut down Google News Spain, and other content aggregators are under threat of being hit with fines at any moment. And that's why I'm not currently allowing feedbunch.com users to subscribe to RSS feeds from spanish newspaper publishers, until the situation changes. Anti-monopoly legislation is fine, but sometimes it can be a hammer that the big players use to hit each other instead of a tool to help new players get in the market.

Oletros 12y ago
Yes, I know that the law was passed. What I asked for was about the claim about the ultimatum Google offered to publishers
- amatriain 12y ago
  This is the best link I've found with a quick search http://the-digital-reader.com/2014/10/22/german-publishers-cave-grant-google-free-permission-use-snippets-search-results/ http://the-digital-reader.com/2014/10/22/german-publishers-c...
  - Oletros 12y ago
    But is still the same, this link doesn't talk about Google given any ultimatum to publishers.
    - amatriain 12y ago
      Germany passed a law intending to make Google pay for using news snippets. Google simply stopped including snippets from german newspapers. German newspapers reluctantly gave an exemption to Google so that it would publish snippets from their websites again. What more evidence do you need? Perhaps only a letter written in blood and signed "give us an exemption or else" accompanied with a horse head would convince you about Google's negotiation tactics here?
      - Oletros 12y ago
        > What more evidence do you need? What evidence? An evidence that it is not a law that forbids putting snippets,. The ones doping ultimatum were the German government and the publishers > Perhaps only a letter written in blood and signed "give us an exemption or else" accompanied with a horse head would convince you about Google's negotiation tactics here? Perhaps not the bend of reality that you're doing I suppose that you also think that in the Spanish case the one doing an ultimatum is also google.

probably_wrong 12y ago

I wrote a similar comment once[1], check those that replied to me. Also, here's an article from Reuters[2] with some details. I'm on mobile, so sorry I can't provide better sources. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8667309 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8667309 [2] http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0IP1YT20141105?irpc=932 http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0IP1YT20141105?irpc...

Oletros 12y ago
Those links doesn't support your claim about "Google gave newspapers two alternatives: Either they gave Google perpetual, royalty-free access to all their content, or they would be removed from search results" What Google did was what the law required. And, by the way, nothing of royalty-free access to all of the content
- probably_wrong 12y ago
  Here's an extract from the German Wikipedia: "Before the [law] came into force on 1 August 2013, Google Germany had written to the press publishers in June 2013. They should tell Google whether they waive all rights under the law on Google News and grant [it] free license. Otherwise, their content would no longer be listed from 1 August in Google News" [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leistungsschutzrecht_f%C3%BCr_Presseverleger https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leistungsschutzrecht_f%C3%BCr_...
  - Oletros 12y ago
    From your quote: > "they waive all rights under the law" Really, stop, what you're linking is what the German law says, there is no ultimatum from Google. Google asked the publishers if they will give the right to publish the snippets without paying or not, nothing less, nothing more. Just what the German law was
    - Dylan16807 12y ago
      What exactly are you objecting to here? "Either you do X or we shut down Y" is an ultimatum. Are you confusing ultimatims with blackmail? It doesn't have to be phrased as a demand. As a friendly opportunity it's still an ultimatum.