bickster Posted February 18, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 1 minute ago, Davkaus said: With respect, I think you're missing the point. User abuse copy and pasting entire articles is an edge case and not the source of the complaint, Australian media companies have argued that Facebook should pay to link to their websites. The Australian proposal wasn't to prohibit distribution of article text, it was to tax companies for linking to the articles, they wanted to tax Google for returning news articles in search results. Yep which is exactly why I brought up PRS. Paying for the priveledge of advertising someone elses product just seems wrong. Always has done to me 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 18, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 2 minutes ago, LondonLax said: Facebook doesn’t want to have to pay for content. It knows Australia is the test case, if it loses there other governments around the world will quickly follow suit. WIll they? Left leading governments maybe, right leaning ones will just want more sharing of articles by the largely right wing media Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 18, 2021 Share Posted February 18, 2021 12 minutes ago, Davkaus said: With respect, I think you're missing the point. User abuse of copy and pasting entire articles is an edge case and not the source of the complaint, Australian media companies have argued that Facebook should pay to link to their websites. The Australian proposal wasn't to prohibit distribution of article text, it was to tax companies for linking to the articles, they wanted to tax Google for returning news articles in search results. The legislation covers both. Facebook and Google both aggregate news. They also both provide news highlights and they both provide direct links to news websites. This content makes them a lot of money. The legislation forces the tech companies into arbitration with the content providers to agree a fair distribution of the revenue from that content. So far Google has agreed contracts with most of the major players whilst Facebook has taken their bat and ball and gone home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 18, 2021 Share Posted February 18, 2021 12 minutes ago, bickster said: WIll they? Left leading governments maybe, right leaning ones will just want more sharing of articles by the largely right wing media The Australian government enacting this legislation is a conservative government. I think taking on big tech monopolies is a bipartisan position at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 18, 2021 Share Posted February 18, 2021 It’s also worth noting that the legislation hasn’t actually been passed yet. This move by Facebook is supposed to be a ‘shock and awe’ / ‘well show them what they’re missing’ move to build pressure against the legislation. If anything it seems to have galvanised public opinion in support of the government position though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted February 18, 2021 Share Posted February 18, 2021 9 minutes ago, LondonLax said: The legislation covers both. Facebook and Google both aggregate news. They also both provide news highlights and they both provide direct links to news websites. This content makes them a lot of money. The legislation forces the tech companies into arbitration with the content providers to agree a fair distribution of the revenue from that content. So far Google has agreed contracts with most of the major players whilst Facebook has taken their bat and ball and gone home. Well, yeah. But you said it was to protect against users pasting entire articles in. I'd actually have no problem with it if that were the case. The link taxing is just a bit backwards though, in my view. The fair revenue for the content providers is the ad revenue they get from the clicks, IMO. Why is this only news media? Surely Google should be paying every company they return in the search results, not just news? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 18, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 4 minutes ago, LondonLax said: The Australian government enacting this legislation is a conservative government. I think taking on big tech monopolies is a bipartisan position at the moment. This really isn't the fight they should be picking. It's actually self destructive for a right wing or "populist" government. They haven't thought this through properly There are many fights governments can pick with Facebook, this isn't the fight they should be having. Like I've said, I wish FB would ban all news stories worldwide, it might put a dent in people being brainwashed by utter filth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 18, 2021 Share Posted February 18, 2021 16 minutes ago, Davkaus said: Well, yeah. But you said it was to protect against users pasting entire articles in. I'd actually have no problem with it if that were the case. The link taxing is just a bit backwards though, in my view. The fair revenue for the content providers is the ad revenue they get from the clicks, IMO. Why is this only news media? Surely Google should be paying every company they return in the search results, not just news? Their news aggregators display headlines and sub headlines from many news providers. You can stop at one and can click through to read the full article but for plenty of readers a page of news highlights will be enough. I guess you could say that is akin to YouTube showing Premier League highlights for viewers who don’t want to watch the full match? The Premier League is pretty quick to enact copyright claims on YouTube highlights videos that have been posted by third party providers to ensure the revenue goes to the rights holders only. I think this is a bit similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 18, 2021 Author Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 51 minutes ago, LondonLax said: Google have agreed to pay all the major news providers in Australia for the rights to display their content on ‘Google News’, including the ABC, it’s not just Murdoch’s stuff. Yep, my bad, looks like just a timing issue, Murdoch was first and ABC should be signed off in the next couple of days along with Nine entertainment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 18, 2021 Author Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 I'm presuming the Australian legislation doesn't just affect a small number of larger companies, I'd guess that would be illegal. What would a similar deal here mean for VT? For the purposes of this do google pay a fee for each media company in Australia? If someone on facebook links to a story in the equivalent of the local newspaper, are facebook in breach of the law even though they didn't know the paper existed? If a student newspaper carries an article written by an eighteen year old on the social values of TikTok and their mate publishes it on facebook can the local comprehensive sue them? If outbychristmas writes a match report on the Collingwood U19 team and it's posted on facebook by an enthusiastic relative of one of the mighty magpies, can Pietalk sue facebook for stealing their content? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 18, 2021 Author Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 15 minutes ago, LondonLax said: The Premier League is pretty quick to enact copyright claims on YouTube highlights videos that have been posted by third party providers to ensure the revenue goes to the rights holders only. I think this is a bit similar. It is in a way, but the Premier League issues takedown reminders on those highlights - under this legislation they'd leave the highlights there and youtube would owe them money, regardless of whether youtube had any idea they were there or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 18, 2021 Author Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 I've just tried to post a link to the Mars landing from ABC and Facebook says no - it's their right as a company to protect themselves legally. If I post the link here, do I put VT into a potential legal argument? If not, then why do we have a law that only affects some platforms, surely that can't be legal? (incidentally ABC have a big banner ad that says "missing our news on facebook? Download our app".) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 18, 2021 Share Posted February 18, 2021 6 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: It is in a way, but the Premier League issues takedown reminders on those highlights - under this legislation they'd leave the highlights there and youtube would owe them money, regardless of whether youtube had any idea they were there or not. Providers like Facebook and YouTube really should have an idea of what is being posted on their sites. They are pretty quick to bring down pictures of pornography for example. The EU actually enacted somewhat similar legislation recently, called Article 13. Under EU law YouTube has to actively monitor what content is put up and proactively take down copyright infringement without the need for a copyright complaint from the content creator. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 18, 2021 Author Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 6 minutes ago, LondonLax said: The EU actually enacted somewhat similar legislation recently, called Article 13. Under EU law YouTube has to actively monitor what content is put up and proactively take down copyright infringement without the need for a copyright complaint from the content creator. Didn't know that and it's interesting because I mean it's absolutely clear that they aren't doing that, pretty much everything on youtube is the copyrighted material of someone else. How does that work with the different types of copyright law - isn't there some US thing where you can use copyrighted film clips if you're producing something that would be considered academic study or critical review based? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 18, 2021 Author Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 @LondonLax you've sent me down the very interesting rabbit hole of the legality of uploaded youtube cover songs. Apparently youtube have a thing that searches content by melody and can detect a cover of a copyright song - but it also has standing agreements in place with some publishers so that covers of their songs are acceptable - however, youtube won't say which publishers these are, so the only way to find out if your cover breaks the law is to upload it and wait! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 18, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 9 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: Didn't know that and it's interesting because I mean it's absolutely clear that they aren't doing that, pretty much everything on youtube is the copyrighted material of someone else. Yes but if its been provided by or endorsed by the copyright holder thats ok. People watch youtube for entertainment, that should be paid for, it isn't the same argument at all imo but again going back to music on there. Most videos are provided by the coptright owners and with pay per click they do earn a albeit small income from that but thats is only right because most people gaining enjoyment from it on YouTube aren't going to buy the product. I don't see copyright infringement on Youtube as even close to the same thing as the subject of this topic. Still trying to find where Facebook aggregates news btw, never seen it and still can't see it despite looking specifically for it 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 18, 2021 Author Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 9 minutes ago, bickster said: Yes but if its been provided by or endorsed by the copyright holder thats ok. People watch youtube for entertainment, that should be paid for, it isn't the same argument at all imo but again going back to music on there. Most videos are provided by the copyright owners and with pay per click they do earn a albeit small income from that but thats is only right because most people gaining enjoyment from it on YouTube aren't going to buy the product. I don't see copyright infringement on Youtube as even close to the same thing as the subject of this topic. Still trying to find where Facebook aggregates news btw, never seen it and still can't see it despite looking specifically for it Agreed on all counts, but there is still plenty of stuff on youtube without the copyright endorsement, although most of it isn't music - except for the covers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 18, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said: although most of it isn't music - except for the covers. Most of that isn't music either 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 18, 2021 Share Posted February 18, 2021 20 minutes ago, bickster said: Still trying to find where Facebook aggregates news btw, never seen it and still can't see it despite looking specifically for it Facebook is one big news aggregator. You ‘like‘ or ‘follow’ something and it keeps sending you articles. Here’s some helpful tips to get better news appearing on your Facebook homepage Quote A majority of U.S. adults now get news on social media. This can be beneficial, exposing people to publications and information they might not otherwise see. Or, as has been the case during this era of fake news, it can be the polar opposite of that. Recently, Facebook has experienced much of the latter, with many citing the spread of misinformation on the network as a danger to democracy. If you’re a user who mines Facebook for news stories, there are some quick, simple steps you can take to filter out the fake news and ensure the information you’re getting is accurate and reliable. https://www.inverse.com/article/27254-how-to-use-facebook-news-aggregator They have actually also recently launched Facebook News which is a dedicated news aggregator. Quote Social media giant Facebook is rolling out Facebook News, an aggregator within the Facebook app that features news from hundreds of national, local and lifestyle outlets in the U.K. https://variety.com/2021/biz/global/facebook-news-uk-1234892161/#! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 18, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2021 23 minutes ago, LondonLax said: Facebook is one big news aggregator. You ‘like‘ or ‘follow’ something and it keeps sending you articles. Here’s some helpful tips to get better news appearing on your Facebook homepage I think we're having different definitions of news here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts