Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google EU News

Google News May Shut in Some Countries Over EU Plans To Charge Tax For Links (theguardian.com) 134

Google's top news executive has refused to rule out shutting down Google News in EU countries, as the search engine faces a battle with Brussels over plans to charge a "link tax" for using news stories. The Guardian reports: Richard Gingras, the search engine's vice-president of news, said while "it's not desirable to shut down services" the company was deeply concerned about the current proposals, which are designed to compensate struggling news publishers if snippets of their articles appear in search results. He told the Guardian that the future of Google News could depend on whether the EU was willing to alter the phrasing of the legislation. "We can't make a decision until we see the final language," he said. He pointed out the last time a government attempted to charge Google for links, in 2014 in Spain, the company responded by shutting down Google News in the country. Spain passed a law requiring aggregation sites to pay for news links, in a bid to prop up struggling print news outlets. Google responded by closing the service for Spanish consumers, which he said prompted a fall in traffic to Spanish news websites. "We would not like to see that happen in Europe," said Gingras. "Right now what we want to do is work with stakeholders."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google News May Shut in Some Countries Over EU Plans To Charge Tax For Links

Comments Filter:
  • And nothing of value was lost.

    • Google being passive aggressive here, I guess.

      In short, Google are saying, "If I cannot play for free, then I'll take my ball altogether."

      I do not think those Europeans will stand to be without Google News for long.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        As a European I won't miss it one bit. Its shite.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        How would you link to a news article if you can't use the headline?

      • Re:Jay Sherman (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @04:48PM (#57681956)

        Never use it personally, so I won't care either way.
        That said I think this is exactly the right response by google.
        A link tax is completely retarded and the only way is to inconvenience people until they get off their ass and make it clear to all their politicians that the laws they are enacting are stupid..

      • Re:Jay Sherman (Score:5, Interesting)

        by F.Ultra ( 1673484 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @04:58PM (#57682004)
        Us Europeans will not miss it one bit, the European printing business that was behind this legislation however will miss it quite a bit since Google News is a major source of users that end up on the various news papers sites.
        • Re:Jay Sherman (Score:5, Insightful)

          by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @05:04PM (#57682056)

          Google will not pull Google News out for any appreciable amount of time, since if they do another company will quickly step in and fill the void.

          Google knows it needs all that data about its users in order to keep its true customers happy.

          • Re:Jay Sherman (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @05:11PM (#57682078)

            > Google will not pull Google News out for any appreciable amount of time, since if they do another company will quickly step in and fill the void.

            Not if the competitor also has to pay per link. No one will touch that business. There's no business model in individual clicks with aggregation.

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              Google is not a charity - it provides the Google News service because it makes money off the Google News service. And, given it's making money off the service, there is room for it find a compromise with the content providers - or, for a competitor to do so if Google pulls out.

              • Google is not a charity

                Correct, but these laws would turn it into one.

                PS: The news sites google is sending people to are full of adverts, etc. Should Google get a cut of that.

              • It depends on whether you need to be as big as Google to make that happen or not. I.e due to how big Google are they can manage to get all the advertisers for their service, something that a new small player will have a much harder time doing. Anyway it will be interesting to see how this all plays out in the end.
        • Re: Jay Sherman (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward

          You would think the EU would look at Spain and the consequences their news industry suffered. But they are like politicians everywhere: corrupt, stupid, and begging to be strung up by a short rope in a tall tree.

          • If I recall correctly the thinking was that Google blocked Spain because Spain is small so if "we" expand the same legislation to the whole of EU then Google will abide due to them not willing to miss out on the larger EU market.

            That is more or less what the printing industry claimed in the news over here; that they was not afraid that Google would simple go away. So hopefully Google will just go away and then we will see how long it will take for the printing lobby to double back.

      • Re:Jay Sherman (Score:5, Interesting)

        by fazig ( 2909523 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @05:43PM (#57682214)
        Google News can go fuck itself with a rusty cheese grater for all I care.

        But still, the idea to tax these things is a delicate issue. Having read the currently approved proposal of Article 11 I know that the wording is pretty vague. Certainly not enough to be sure for what they really want. In its current form it would allow "mere hyperlinks accompanied by individual words". Mere hyperlinks, sure. Those usually also contain the head line. But what the hell is "individual words" supposed to mean here? How much leeway can you have here as a for profit company? Would you be able to write a small synopsis of the article in your own individual words?
        • by Anonymous Coward

          Google AI Synopses. But then would the AI production counted as a separate work and would the lack of that status cause issues with copyright? Copyright is used apparently to protect some historical tourist locations from being photographed as well.

        • Those usually also contain the head line. But what the hell is "individual words" supposed to mean here? How much leeway can you have here as a for profit company? Would you be able to write a small synopsis of the article in your own individual words?

          There's an HTML tag to tell google what to put in the article summary. All those 'dictionary' sites (for example) fill it with fluff so that google doesn't show the actual word definition, it's all "We;re the best dictionary, get the best definition of XXX here! We're the best!".

          Newspapers could do exactly the same if they wanted. They think they can get free money instead so fuck 'em.

      • Google being passive aggressive here, I guess.

        In short, Google are saying, "If I cannot play for free, then I'll take my ball altogether."

        Nope. If google has to start paying you to to provide search hits for your site then their whole company collapses.

        I do not think those Europeans will stand to be without Google News for long.

        I can't wait for them to spend huge resources getting these laws passed only to see their web sites vanish from the web.

        Yes, they are that stupid. It's already happened here in Spain.

      • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Thursday November 22, 2018 @04:51AM (#57683692)

        I do not think those Europeans will stand to be without Google News for long.

        European here.

        What is Google News?

  • by Anonymous Coward

    If you read the proposal, there's no link tax.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    The original problem was the Google News would show enough of the story that people didn't go to the originating site to read it. When asked to reduce it to the headline and a link they pulled the "we're Google and we can do what we want" card. Which is why Spain started charging

    • by Ungrounded Lightning ( 62228 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @05:05PM (#57682064) Journal

      The original problem was the Google News would show enough of the story that people didn't go to the originating site to read it. When asked to reduce it to the headline and a link...

      On the other hand, headlnes are often bogus attention-grabbers, serving as both eye- and click-bait. Allowing aggregators to post only headline plus link encourages news sites to accelerate this trend.

      The user needs enough context beyond the headline to determine whether the article is about something he actually wants to read. Of course, giving him this means he doesn't follow some links, which might be what is producing the signal that the EU legislators are concerned about.

      There's a (thick) line between giving enough context to let the user skip the uninteresting and irrelevant chaff (good) and enough more that he gets the valuable reporting without following the link (I.P. appropriation).

      Allowing aggregators to occupy some patch on that line is an application of "fair use". Legislation to define that region needs to take this into account. "Just headline plus link" is clearly outside that patch.

      • Isn't this a great opportunity to put their AI to work?
        Either by not posting links to articles with misleading headlines, or by automatically adding automated commentary.
        "New research proves coffee prevents cancer!" -- (Headline exaggerates findings. Article makes weaker claims)
        "Mother gives kids milk for breakfast, you won't believe what happens next!" - (What happens next is not at all surprising)

  • Is the eu requiring google to run news, and also requiring them to pay shitty euro publishers for it.
    • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

      No. But google's business is to be in as many aspects of consumer's life as possible. Getting data on what kind of news person consumes is an excellent additional tool of data gathering on that specific individual.

      Google won't lose it's bread and butter of being able to identify people's tastes and needs with high degree of accuracy from losing ability to serve news to people, but it will certainly be hurt.

    • No, the guy who wants to make others pay for shit he wants to build lives on a different continent.

  • by Tyrannosaur ( 2485772 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @04:58PM (#57682006)

    All they'd have to do is charge the news outlets for listing their articles. Problem solved. Lol.

  • EU gonna EU (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ChromeAeonuim ( 1026946 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @04:59PM (#57682020)

    Spain passed a law requiring aggregation sites to pay for news links, in a bid to prop up struggling print news outlets. Google responded by closing the service for Spanish consumers, which he said prompted a fall in traffic to Spanish news websites.

    And there it is, same as usual. Google is directing traffic to these site, helping them generate ad revenue, but somehow still owes them. Don't misunderstand me here, I'm no Google cheerleader and the EU does sometimes make good points regarding some issues (like privacy), but I know a shakedown when I see one. As usual, the EU is just trying to skim money off the American companies to make up for their own lack of homegrown innovation. Notice how they'll never target Ecosia or Qwant for any of their ridiculous stuff.

    • * helping them generate ad revenue for Google and give end users a world yet more overrun by ads

      • by kqs ( 1038910 )

        * give end users a world with lots of free websites with ads, and a few pay websites that few people use.

        I don't like ads either, but I'm honest enough to admit that I'd rather have ads and websites, rather than no ads and almost no websites. Until someone comes up with a better way to pay for the web, we use what we have.

        • Until someone comes up with a better way to pay for the web, we use what we have.

          We had a better way when the web was young. People who wanted to host content... hosted that content. And pay sites existed before the internet was even a thing that people could connect to, for example there were all kinds of resources on Compu$erve with their own fee structures.

          Something like Facebook, which commercializes your personal information, ought to be able to function without ads as well.

      • From the linked article:

          “There’s no advertising in Google News. It is not a revenue-generating product to Google. We think it’s valuable as a service to society. We are proud to have it as part of the stable of properties that people have.”

        So... nope, there is no ad revenue for Google.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Google makes money from advertising on its services, including News. News is made up entirely of snippets from news sites. Snippets that cost money to produce.

      Google doesn't set up its own news service, it relies on others doing that work to populate Google News.

      Of course Google does pay people for their work populating Google sites, such as YouTube. They seem to think of News as being more like search, but it's not really because most of the time it's used as a newspaper style presentation of current event

      • Re:EU gonna EU (Score:5, Informative)

        by colonslash ( 544210 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @05:47PM (#57682228)

        It's pretty simple. If the news sites don't want Google to index their content, they should specify that in their robots.txt files. If they want their content indexed by Google, they should allow that in their robots.txt files. It's easy:

        User-agent: Google
        Disallow: /

        These sites are getting free indexing from Google, and Google is directing traffic their way.

        I'd argue that each individual site gets more value out of Google than the other way around, so if anything, Google should be charging the news sites.

      • Why don't you start the ball rolling by paying every newspaper a small fee if you happen to see a headline? It costs money for them to produce those headlines, after all, so it's only fair that you pay them for it even if you aren't going to buy the paper and read the entire story.

  • will set up servers inside the USA and/or other nations outside the EU because they will lose a lot of web traffic when google pulls the plug...
  • The modern EU nation state takes the fun and freedom of the innovative US internet and adds a new EU link tax.
    Only EU bureaucrats could take something as amazing and free as the internet and work hard to add a link tax.

    Publish behind a paywall and take the paper readers to a paying digital version if the EU publication has value.
    Don't tax the internet for the inability to keep a media empire in profit.
  • by TheZeitgeist ( 5083373 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @05:52PM (#57682250)

    Every time I hear about Europe and the internet/tech its about how EU wants to tax/fine/punish/legislate/regulate something. Never about the latest thing, or the cool new invention, or whatever. Always taxes-fines-punish-etc.

    This all the stranger because there's a lot of Europeans per se who've done all kinds of things for the internet. Lee invented the web, Guido invented Python, Linus invented all kinds of stuff. And they all work in the US now for US companies. Nokia gone. Ericsson hurting. Phillips now cheap Wal Mart TV's. Thompson...who's that? lol. ARM is "European" in sense of a street address for corporate HQ and nothing else.

    Poor Europe.

    • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      Poor Europe.

      They may have smaller houses; but on average they are healthier, live longer, have longer vacations, and better safety nets.

      Maybe their trickle-down via regulation/taxes has something going for it. To them, there's more important things in life than "big toys".

      • Except for the south and the east.
    • Envy and resentment. They're all tied up in knots that the Americans are kicking their asses, and instead of replying with competition, they instead attempt to regulate. You have to realize how humiliating it is for them to be forced to follow the Americans when everyone knows Europe is clearly superior. A good way to restore their damaged psychological state is to lash out against those Americans who make them feel bad. They want so desperately to be seen as the best and to humiliate the Americans instead,
      • Poe's Law is strong in this one. Really can't tell whether it's sarcasm or ignorance.

        • Most Europeans are not properly educated on how much they depend on the US. The US is almost exclusively depicted in a negative way and blamed for stuff, while the US is almost never depicted in a positive way and given its due credit. A lot of Europeans directly link their view of their own individual countries and the EU/Europe as a whole to their view of the US as a point of contrast. Because they see things along those lines, and because they want to depict themselves as being superior to the US, they m

      • Dude, kicking donkeys is animal abuse!

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Huh?

      Every time I hear about Europe and the internet/tech its about how EU wants to tax/fine/punish/legislate/regulate something. Never about the latest thing, or the cool new invention, or whatever. Always taxes-fines-punish-etc. This all the stranger because there's a lot of Europeans per se who've done all kinds of things for the internet.

      You are literally contradicting yourself there.

      Unless in pragraph 1 you are referring ot the "EU" as "Europe" and in paragraph 2 not. That's the only way it makes sense

    • Every time I hear about Europe and the internet/tech its about how EU wants to tax/fine/punish/legislate/regulate something. Never about the latest thing, or the cool new invention, or whatever. Always taxes-fines-punish-etc.

      Congradulations on becoming self-aware enough to realise that you live in an echo chamber.

      Mind you it depends on how you define the latest thing. Some of the arguably most valuable things to come out of the USA have been Facebook and Uber. If you limit your view of innovation to IT related unicorns then there's no doubt that the USA holds an absolute monopoly on that, there is however a doubt whether that is a worthy claim to fame.

      In terms of innovation the Global Innovation Index however shows parts of Eur

    • by sad_ ( 7868 )

      you hear only those things because you're reading US news sites, but don't worry, on EU sites we read how great the EU is and about the many fails of US/Asia. I'm sure on other continent news sites it's the same story (we are great, the rest is fail).

  • by Maelwryth ( 982896 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @06:02PM (#57682290) Homepage Journal
    Many of the fake news problems have (IMO) been caused by publishers relying on the numbers coming to their pages instead of the quality of their news. As an alternative, look at the Economist Group (Owners of the Economist). They rely on subscriptions and seem to be doing just fine [wikipedia.org] in the face of the Internet.
  • which are designed to compensate struggling news publishers

    While in general I really don't like Trump, it would be satisfying in a primal way if he told their news orgs, "Get with the times you loser luddites and stop interfering with US companies!". He scratches the itch of the inner caveman.

    • which are designed to compensate struggling news publishers

      While in general I really don't like Trump, it would be satisfying in a primal way if he told their news orgs, "Get with the times you loser luddites and stop interfering with US companies!". He scratches the itch of the inner caveman.

      A Ministry of truth would turn the trick. One where citizens would eliminate any incorrect news, and one that could also shut down the present liberal media and replace it with truthful news run by government owned entities.

      Then after a period of time to settle down, and to eliminate the recalcitrant in the name of truth and patriotism, we will have no news that is fake, only truthful news that ensures domestic tranquility, and ensured by the Ministry of truth.

      • Hey, we had that for about half a century!

        Hmm... some people think that life was better back then... maybe you do have a point...

        • Hey, we had that for about half a century!

          Hmm... some people think that life was better back then... maybe you do have a point...

          Wow - I re-read what I wrote, man - that was kinda dark. Hopefully I didn't Poe anyone.

          On the front of our lad Donnie, and his crusade for truth, I see that Chief Justice Thomas gave him a dressing down yesterday When the most conservative guy on the Supreme court tells the Republicans to step off, we are on the cusp of maximally interesting times.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    ... shut down free advertising for them. Everyone else tries to get google to provide lots of links to their site.

    • by nnull ( 1148259 )

      They don't like it because it gave rise to a lot of competitors in the news industry. Dailymail was just a crappy UK tabloid paper (It still is) and now it's grown to be a major distribution of news thanks to Google and English speakers, just basically dominating the English speaking news around the globe. The old papers want to be he de-facto news sources.

      Limiting links would prevent these small vile news companies from becoming successful, we can't allow that!

      • The popularity of Dailymail is in shock videos of people getting shot and bleeding heart stories. Any paper that wants to compete with that isn't worth reading anyway.

Do you suffer painful hallucination? -- Don Juan, cited by Carlos Casteneda

Working...