Google threatens to pull search engine in Australia

Facebook is also against this law and is threatening to stop news content in Australia. I am not sure on the exact details on the law, maybe some of our Australian posters can clarify exactly what they are proposing. As google is not the only search engine out there, if the law is passed this could provide a bump to other search engines that will abide by this law. Maybe Australia needs a home grown search engine.

 

I'm not Australian but vaguely interested in the topic in general. This appears to be the bill in question; https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...slation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6652

It's the usual difficult legalese but I have to say it does look like it could be as bad as Google are saying. It seems that not only could they be required to pay Australian news sources for just returning links to their content in search results, it seems to me that the law could also prevent the search engines from doing a lot of the logical filtering and ordering of content they currently do. Basically, it seems that for anything a news source publishes on their websites, a search engine would have to return it in any searches it naturally matches but then would have to pay the news source for doing that.

This would apply to all major search engines plus other sites like Facebook, Twitter and the like so I don't see anyone winning from it. It would also apply to any new Australian-based search engine unless the Australian government chose to show them favouritism (and I don't know if that would be legal there).

I suspect (and hope) this is still political back and forth and will lead to something more rational in the end.

 

It is quite clear. Google search, FB, et al enjoy free content, and aren't willing to pay for it's use to keep their platforms competitive. So, like petulant children, they threaten to take their toys away. Ok. Bye. Google doesn't deem itself responsible for the intelectual property of others. And that's how they got rich. Simple stuff.

 

I think it would be a benefit to the Australian people. Then they could be motivated to use better, more balanced search engines.

 

search engines return links, charging a search engine for every site's links returned would be ridiculous, google would have no choice but to block their search engine from Australia if that happened, that is not a threat, that is just a fact

 

wouldn't this apply to ALL search engines? not just googles?

google is speaking out on it, but think would apply to them all

all search engines would have to block all news sites from their returned links

 

Search engines (not just Google) aren't really using the content though, they're just providing links to it. They obviously make money from providing that service but it is still essentially a service.

Would you prefer to see the option of allowing search engines to simple exclude any content from search results by the news organisation who object to "using" it?

 

Plus, any news website that wants to exempt themselves from Google search results can easily do so. Noindex/nofollow tags are easy to implement.

 

I think this will be a careful what you wish for, if they get this passed, those news corps will not be happy with their government when they no longer show up in search results

 

Yep. A free service. And probably responsible for most of the traffic that the news sites receive. And the option actually already exists on the website owner's side: anyone can exempt their website from Google's search results if they want to. I've done it many times for websites I've worked on: excluding them from search results until the site is media ready, then flipping the switch back on.

 

most sites want to be higher up on the rankings as it makes them $$$

I have never heard a site say, that dang search engine is directing too much traffic my way, we should charge them to provide my links in a search result

 

Good point. I don't know. It is beginning to sound like a bad law. It is pretty silly to disallow search engines to link to news sources. I generally prefer to have people decide these things rather than governments.

 

looks like our political forum would have to block the au news links too, or they could be charged a fee as well

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;db=LEGISLATION;id=legislation/bills/r6652_first-reps/0001;query=Id:"legislation/bills/r6652_first-reps/0000";rec=0

"
52B Making content available

(1) For the purposes of this Part, a service makes content available if:

(a) the content is reproduced on the service, or is otherwise placed on the service; or

(b) a link to the content is provided on the service; or

(c) an extract of the content is provided on the service.
"

if I recall, America tried to consider links to be copyrighted long ago too, but quickly realized that was a bad move, I assume the au will too

 

What's next, charging students for listing sources in their bibliographies? Honestly, I can see perhaps some justification for 1a (if it weren't for the fact that it is easy to opt out) but 1b is just looney, as is 1c.

"Hey, I'm going to provide a free service that makes more money for you."
"Wait, are you getting money out of this too?"
"Well . . yes, otherwise I wouldn't have a business."
"I want that, too."
"Wait . . . what? No. I guess this was a bad idea. I'm not going to give you my free service anymore."
"No faaaaaaair! That's a threat!"

 

Google is not against paying, they just want to have control over how much money they pay. I think they are afraid of uncertainty. I.e an unexpected large bill.

I'm sure there will be a way forward

 

I do not think google will ever pay to provide links in a search engine... it would not make sense as the more popular a site is, the more is would cost google to send traffic there, most sites want traffic and would actually pay to get more

 

Fair enough. I'm actually waiting for a decent investigative journalist to clearly explain what's going on.

"forced to pay news outlets, in return for showing their content " is a bit ambiguous.

I think it's a bit more than just linking.

 

I have to wonder if the Australians who bash Trump daily on PF will opine on this topic?

 

Bye

 

These big tech companies are pure tyrants.

 

Only for those who think that private property rights are tyranny . . . which is the most far left/Marxist position you can hold on the subject. Welcome comrade! We must dismantle the bourgeoisie, da?

 

...but will destroy the capacity of local news organisations to pay investigative journalists......

Another example of market failure?

 

How will providing additional revenue to a previously dying industry destroy the industry?

 

Yeah - At the moment this is a hearing into how the bill might be framed

 

When we wake up - yes we will