3 ms·

It looks to me like a PUBLISHER was quoted as saying "puts enormous value on content if search engines are prepared to pay us to index with them." This means p

by dpcan 17y ago

It looks to me like a PUBLISHER was quoted as saying "puts enormous value on content if search engines are prepared to pay us to index with them." This means publishers appear to be using some leverage with search engines, forcing them into the position of possibly having to purchase the right to index their content. This is kind-of what Twitter is doing with bing, right? Imagine if WebMD started doing this, followed by others. We'd have to go to Bing for some content, Google for other content, and there would be a PirateSearchBay that just indexed everything that people would be forced to use.

dtf 17y ago
Metacrawler has been running longer than Google. Strange we could go back to using these kind of search engines.
greyman 17y ago
[This means publishers appear to be using some leverage with search engines, forcing them into the position of possibly having to purchase the right to index their content.] Yes, that's correct, I think. They (or at least Murdoch) wants to do that. Most of the folks here seems to defend Google, and some of their points are valid, but let's try to look at the issue from the publishers point of view. As it is now, Google just index their content, make a good money out of it, and then give back only a link to that content. And when publisher wants money for the indexing right, Google just says to them: "Shut up, be happy that you've got a free link from us." But... why should the publisher agree with that? They have a full right to ask money for indexing their content. Now, I think this will be interesting. So far, Internet users have a perception that "there is everything in Google", and it's also Google's core mission, to index all of the worlds information. But it seems everyone just supposed Google should have a right to index everything for free, so now everyone seems surprised that it's not so. But, it is not Murdoch who drilled a hole to Google's strategy, it was Twitter. Google admitted they are willing to pay for indexing rights, so Murdoch demands the same. I am really curious to see what Google will do about it.
- DarkShikari 17y ago
  They have a full right to ask money for indexing their content. Seriously? A Dewey Decimal catalogue system should pay money for listing a book? The White Pages should pay me for including my phone number? People pay to get entries in the Yellow Pages, not the other way around.

by dpcan 17y ago

dtf 17y ago

Metacrawler has been running longer than Google. Strange we could go back to using these kind of search engines.

greyman 17y ago

[This means publishers appear to be using some leverage with search engines, forcing them into the position of possibly having to purchase the right to index their content.] Yes, that's correct, I think. They (or at least Murdoch) wants to do that. Most of the folks here seems to defend Google, and some of their points are valid, but let's try to look at the issue from the publishers point of view. As it is now, Google just index their content, make a good money out of it, and then give back only a link to that content. And when publisher wants money for the indexing right, Google just says to them: "Shut up, be happy that you've got a free link from us." But... why should the publisher agree with that? They have a full right to ask money for indexing their content. Now, I think this will be interesting. So far, Internet users have a perception that "there is everything in Google", and it's also Google's core mission, to index all of the worlds information. But it seems everyone just supposed Google should have a right to index everything for free, so now everyone seems surprised that it's not so. But, it is not Murdoch who drilled a hole to Google's strategy, it was Twitter. Google admitted they are willing to pay for indexing rights, so Murdoch demands the same. I am really curious to see what Google will do about it.

DarkShikari 17y ago
They have a full right to ask money for indexing their content. Seriously? A Dewey Decimal catalogue system should pay money for listing a book? The White Pages should pay me for including my phone number? People pay to get entries in the Yellow Pages, not the other way around.