A few days of Google-FB-Twitter blackout for Spain would reverse this law, but the newspapers that proposed it should be banned forever from the search engines and social sites, to teach them a lesson.
and the point is that these publishers don't realize that all these news aggregators are sending a considerable amount of visits to them
this is a picture of an editorial celebrating that this law was passed and how they include the buttons to send the article to the aggregators: http://mnmstatic.net/cache/21/eb/thumb_medium-2223027.jpg
There's no hypocrisy there. The law appears to be based on the idea that sending the article on social media should produce money for the article writer... obviously this would be a reason to encourage flowing the article out to social media rather than inhibiting it.
Well, you have to remember that Spanish politics is completely fucked up. American politics are only recently beginning to come close, to add a sense of scale. Doesn't help that they have legal cruft dating back to the medieval ages, but that's separate.
Because they have been led to believe other EU countries will follow suit, which is not entirely outside of the realm of possibility. Personally I also suspect that there is extensive "sponsoring" by the content industry going on. They see Spain is vulnerable, so they probably see it as a cheap foot in the door for the entire EU.
Living in Germany myself, the cynic in me can already envision the German adaptation of this, which would include the same definition of the crime, but they would allow arbitrary lawyers to send cost notices of, say, €10k to private individuals and owners of small websites. The €300k will then only be enforced if you don't pay up. While that is going on, large companies will do backroom deals so they can carry on like before.
These laws are never designed to stop Google, Twitter, or Facebook. They'll be just fine, as long as they pay enough behind the scenes. It's always about the little guys.
Same here, had no idea about this. News are just a diversion (basically just 30 minutes of sports) to keep people "busy" while they (politicians) keep doing whatever the hell they want.
Because Spanish politics is an inbred kind of politics.
People joke in Latin America about Spaniards because of their remarkably low knowledge of foreign languages and outside culture, or the fact that they watch American films overdubbed whereas others just watch them with subtitles.
It's a subtle thing, but there's a perception, to me not unfounded, that some sectors of Spanish society just don't look outward much, which is the reason they get these crazy ideas that wouldn't even be considered for a second anywhere else.
I agree with you until last paragraph. As I said in another reply, I think that this law is based on economical protection of the two main political parties.
The lack of knowledge of foreign languages is clearly a issue. I think that our country is solving this making B1 mandatory to get you graduated and enforcing bilingual basic education on the capital. Not so much, but it seems to start giving some results.
We have to watch doubbed films when we're in groups because this problem. I know people that prefer original versions, but you can not exclude your friends when social watching.
> It's a subtle thing, but there's a perception, to me not unfounded, that some sectors of Spanish society just don't look outward much, which is the reason they get these crazy ideas that wouldn't even be considered for a second anywhere else.
Does not that contradicts the fact that, for example, Spain has one of the largest high-speed train networks in the world, that the electricity they produce is >50% from renewable sources, that big civil engineering companies are involved with building major infrastructure around the world (including airport terminals at Heathrow, Sydney), that their medical service is within the top ten in the world, that same-sex marriage has been completely legal (including adoption) for almost a decade now, etc. These facts do not seem to fit your perception of a backwards-looking country.
I don't see the contradiction; competent engineering knowledge has little correlation with political thinking, and is only limited to a small subset of the population. It says nothing about the millions of unemployed and underemployed people, the housewives, and politicians.
The aspects in health care and same-sex marriage are not and have not been particularly controversial in Western Europe as a matter of social policy in that time span. They are interesting points of policy but by themselves nothing special when compared to the number of forward-thinking policies most countries in Western Europe have.
What I have seen, from both personal experience and an amount of anectdote that goes beyond mere personal recollections, is a remarkable lack of interest and knowledge in foreign cultures, and an incredibly regressive management culture in the workplace.
All countries have technological outliers. The point is that they're exactly that, outliers.
From what I understand, Twitter only posts content from the linked site (expanded tweets) if the site is a partner or (twitter cards) if the site actively includes code for Twitter. Anything you can squeeze into 140 characters is surely protected as a (very) limited quote.
Which makes me question this article. Did they really pass a law requiring payment for quoting small parts of an article? Seems unlikely. Paying for merely linking to a site would be even crazier.
The Heise article says so - arbitrarily small citations fall under this law, and it includes hyperlinks. A link is enough. The fine can be up to € 300k or six years in prison. The Spanish education minister hails this as a pioneering effort designed to be followed up by the EU at large.
> arbitrarily small citations fall under this law, and it includes hyperlinks.
Is this law retroactive? What do you do with the already existing links on the Spanish web and Spanish wikipedia ? It's not just a Google tax, it's a Hypertext tax.
Too bad. I hope those will stop linking to Spanish news outlets (especially those who pushed for this) regardless. A few days of that and the law is history.
This is ridiculous... seems to me that much of the role of news reporting and publishing is being increasingly filled by social media. I think this is a pretty good thing because it democratizes the press and lets people decide to publish what they think is most important. These laws seem like a step in the wrong direction...
Sure, but be prepared to say goodbye to your high-end medical system, social rights (e.g. same-sex marriage, unemployment benefits), food culture, etc.
This is uninformed speculation, but I imagine two reasons:
1. You can skim an aggregated list of headlines and get a quick glance of current events without ever clicking through to the actual sites, thus causing them to lose out on ad revenue.
2. Newspapers like being linked to but don't want their competitors linked to, and think they'd be better off overall in a world where people directly visited the web site of their preferred news outlet.
Well, doesn't that mean that big websites will just filter out all links to those websites? It sounds very counterproductive. If they insist I think they would eradicate Spanish news agencies completely.
The hypothesis is that google is, on the whole, parasitic to news organizations. I think, unlike the hysteria on HN, that it is far from obvious this is wrong. We'll hopefully get to see the results of the experiment.
Looks like the experiment has a good chance of being run soon. If News and Search drop these sites, we'll see whether the 'parasite' has been good or bad for the host.
If this were true, presumably some smart news organizations would be blocking Google from extracting this value by excluding themselves from the index via robots.txt, yet I'm not aware of any.
The publishers view robots.txt as a catch-22: be indexed and lose money or refuse to be indexed and lose money. So they're trying a third option: demand to be indexed and demand to be paid.
Germany introduced a similar law over a year ago, some german news organisations want 11% of Googles world wide gross sales as compensation! They also argue that Google isn't allowed to delist them because of its market power. Theire chance to win this are probably almost zero but they will use that to get a better law next time.
57 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 112 ms ] threadMore opinion: http://globalvoicesonline.org/2014/07/26/spanish-congress-co...
Maybe someone who speaks Spanish could provide a more detailed article? The English-language web appears to be shallow this time.
Can you give examples of that?
Living in Germany myself, the cynic in me can already envision the German adaptation of this, which would include the same definition of the crime, but they would allow arbitrary lawyers to send cost notices of, say, €10k to private individuals and owners of small websites. The €300k will then only be enforced if you don't pay up. While that is going on, large companies will do backroom deals so they can carry on like before.
These laws are never designed to stop Google, Twitter, or Facebook. They'll be just fine, as long as they pay enough behind the scenes. It's always about the little guys.
The main political parties have economic interest in mass media companies (like PRISA group). They are covering the hand who feds them.
Talking with other citiziens, they have no idea about this law being passed or does not support it.
Thanks to OP for posting it here.
People joke in Latin America about Spaniards because of their remarkably low knowledge of foreign languages and outside culture, or the fact that they watch American films overdubbed whereas others just watch them with subtitles.
It's a subtle thing, but there's a perception, to me not unfounded, that some sectors of Spanish society just don't look outward much, which is the reason they get these crazy ideas that wouldn't even be considered for a second anywhere else.
The lack of knowledge of foreign languages is clearly a issue. I think that our country is solving this making B1 mandatory to get you graduated and enforcing bilingual basic education on the capital. Not so much, but it seems to start giving some results.
We have to watch doubbed films when we're in groups because this problem. I know people that prefer original versions, but you can not exclude your friends when social watching.
Why not original versions with subtitles?
Does not that contradicts the fact that, for example, Spain has one of the largest high-speed train networks in the world, that the electricity they produce is >50% from renewable sources, that big civil engineering companies are involved with building major infrastructure around the world (including airport terminals at Heathrow, Sydney), that their medical service is within the top ten in the world, that same-sex marriage has been completely legal (including adoption) for almost a decade now, etc. These facts do not seem to fit your perception of a backwards-looking country.
The aspects in health care and same-sex marriage are not and have not been particularly controversial in Western Europe as a matter of social policy in that time span. They are interesting points of policy but by themselves nothing special when compared to the number of forward-thinking policies most countries in Western Europe have.
What I have seen, from both personal experience and an amount of anectdote that goes beyond mere personal recollections, is a remarkable lack of interest and knowledge in foreign cultures, and an incredibly regressive management culture in the workplace.
All countries have technological outliers. The point is that they're exactly that, outliers.
Yes, that crazy idea would never have been considered in Germany, for example
Which makes me question this article. Did they really pass a law requiring payment for quoting small parts of an article? Seems unlikely. Paying for merely linking to a site would be even crazier.
This will do wonders for the SEO of these newspapers, not to mention their presence at all in the discourse.
Is this law retroactive? What do you do with the already existing links on the Spanish web and Spanish wikipedia ? It's not just a Google tax, it's a Hypertext tax.
Google+, Twitter, Facebook and other social networks won't be subject to this tax.
It's ridiculous how fucking idiotic our politicians can be and people still keep voting them.
EDIT: Typo.
Sure, but be prepared to say goodbye to your high-end medical system, social rights (e.g. same-sex marriage, unemployment benefits), food culture, etc.
1. You can skim an aggregated list of headlines and get a quick glance of current events without ever clicking through to the actual sites, thus causing them to lose out on ad revenue.
2. Newspapers like being linked to but don't want their competitors linked to, and think they'd be better off overall in a world where people directly visited the web site of their preferred news outlet.
Google would presumably stop returning results for Spanish content to avoiding getting charged, resulting in dropped traffic, and less ad dollars.
These newspapers sales on-paper are dropping alarmingly. They're looking at this as a way to monetize their online versions.
What has already happened: A major spanish social link aggregator (a-la-digg) is boicotting these newspapers.
What will happen: Google will remove them from the index. They'll lose exposure, and therefore make even less.