3 ms·

Those links doesn't support your claim about "Google gave newspapers two alternatives: Either they gave Google perpetual, royalty-free access to all their conte

by 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.
    - Oletros 12y ago
      > What exactly are you objecting to here? "Either you do X or we shut down Y" is an ultimatum. Original situation: Search engines put snippets of news without paying Germany pass a law: If you don't pay you have to stop putting snippets Google: I don't want to pay, I will stop to put snippets as the law say Where the heck is the ultimatum from Google, the ultimatum was from the German govern and a law to the liking of German publishers.
      - Dylan16807 12y ago
        Original situation: Search engines put snippets of news without paying Germany passes a law: If you don't pay or reach another agreement you have to stop putting snippets Google: I don't want to pay, you either let me use snippets free or I will stop as the law says There, with the gaps filled in you can easily see the ultimatum from Google. In the Spain case there is no ultimatum, Google just shut down. In Germany Google looked at the law and then gave newspapers a final choice.
        zaroth 12y ago
        I think it's a fair point, "I'd like to keep doing X, but if you want me to stop, I will" is not really an ultimatum in the traditional sense, because there's no retaliation. I think it's a stretch to say it's retaliation to not agree to start paying someone for something which was previously free. Example, I use Google Apps for a while and it's free. One day Google says, guess what we're going to start charging for this service in a couple months, if you want to keep using it, enter credit card details here. I don't enter my credit card details, and stop using the service. Did I just "retaliate" against Google? Perhaps, but I can see where Oletros is coming from.
        Dylan16807 12y ago
        But they're not just not paying. They're offering to perform a search service in exchange for a brand new license. Your description is a much better fit for the Spain situation.
        zaroth 12y ago
        So to continue my (somewhat strained) example from above... I contact Google and offer to continue using Google Apps, but only if they let me do it for free. I think in this case they are saying, "if you want to be in Google News, you can be, your choice bro." I just can't see any problem with that. It's just like robots.txt, except German law made it opt-in instead of opt-out. It was opt-out, the law made it opt-in, so, well, now they gotta opt-in! Google really was a neutral 3rd party to the whole fiasco... in this case.

by Oletros 12y ago

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.
  - Oletros 12y ago
    > What exactly are you objecting to here? "Either you do X or we shut down Y" is an ultimatum. Original situation: Search engines put snippets of news without paying Germany pass a law: If you don't pay you have to stop putting snippets Google: I don't want to pay, I will stop to put snippets as the law say Where the heck is the ultimatum from Google, the ultimatum was from the German govern and a law to the liking of German publishers.
    - Dylan16807 12y ago
      Original situation: Search engines put snippets of news without paying Germany passes a law: If you don't pay or reach another agreement you have to stop putting snippets Google: I don't want to pay, you either let me use snippets free or I will stop as the law says There, with the gaps filled in you can easily see the ultimatum from Google. In the Spain case there is no ultimatum, Google just shut down. In Germany Google looked at the law and then gave newspapers a final choice.
      - zaroth 12y ago
        I think it's a fair point, "I'd like to keep doing X, but if you want me to stop, I will" is not really an ultimatum in the traditional sense, because there's no retaliation. I think it's a stretch to say it's retaliation to not agree to start paying someone for something which was previously free. Example, I use Google Apps for a while and it's free. One day Google says, guess what we're going to start charging for this service in a couple months, if you want to keep using it, enter credit card details here. I don't enter my credit card details, and stop using the service. Did I just "retaliate" against Google? Perhaps, but I can see where Oletros is coming from.
        Dylan16807 12y ago
        But they're not just not paying. They're offering to perform a search service in exchange for a brand new license. Your description is a much better fit for the Spain situation.
        zaroth 12y ago
        So to continue my (somewhat strained) example from above... I contact Google and offer to continue using Google Apps, but only if they let me do it for free. I think in this case they are saying, "if you want to be in Google News, you can be, your choice bro." I just can't see any problem with that. It's just like robots.txt, except German law made it opt-in instead of opt-out. It was opt-out, the law made it opt-in, so, well, now they gotta opt-in! Google really was a neutral 3rd party to the whole fiasco... in this case.