Posted on 12/07/2020 8:42:21 PM PST by 11th_VA
SYDNEY: Australia locked in plans on Tuesday to make Facebook Inc and Google pay its media outlets for news content, a world-first move aimed at protecting independent journalism that has drawn strong opposition from the internet giants.
Under laws to be introduced to parliament on Wednesday, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said the Big Tech firms will have to negotiate how much they pay local publishers and broadcasters for content that appears on their platforms.
If they cannot strike a deal, a government-appointed arbitrator will decide how much they will need to pay.
"This is a huge reform, this is a world first, and the world is watching what happens here in Australia," Frydenberg told reporters in the capital Canberra.
(Excerpt) Read more at bangkokpost.com ...
All this will do is put all the local news outlets out of business, as Google and Facebook hire local bloggers as reporters.
Well, I claim “E”, “e”, “T”, “t”, “N”, “n”.
Anyone posting these pays me big. In Bitcoin (or Krugerands).
The Murdochs and the other media magnates in Australia have the Liberal Party that leads the government in their back pockets.
Back in the 1930’s the newspapers and wire services organized to deny the radio stations and networks from using their content at all unless a radio station was owned by a newspaper.
There was quite a fight back then over the matter.
The radio stations and networks ended up getting access to the wire services but they had to pay for wire service content.
Depending on how things turn out by Jan 20th, there may be significant changes in how people use the net.
Did you mean: Austria
No results containing all your search terms were found.
Your search - Australia - did not match any documents.
Hm. How is this bill actually worded though? Are hyperlinked titles acceptable? Short excerpts? Some quoting? Or does anything at all require payment of some sort?
Would not the local bloggers just be bloggers and should said bloggers just do copies of the existing news services output be seen as content from source.
Bloggers very very rarely are reporters, journalists or otherwise.
Example, blogger bob rehashes news from mainstream (all owned by only a few individuals) of a dog biting a hippo, and adds pics from Australian msm site.
Then blogger sends it to US or international MSM.... Result, blogger gets hit with copyright and intellectual property use, and has to pay for the content. Though would not the receiving MSM he sent it to also be enjoined in a bill for content ??
Regards
Nope.
It means FascistBook and Booble has to pay for the news they steal. I’m sure Australian news companies will release it free elsewhere.
It wouldn’t surprise me if Facebook just went out and bought two or three newspapers in each country, and used them to ‘pour’ their news to local viewers. Most newspapers are valued at a all-time low...would be pretty easy to go and buy them.
Not likely unless paywalled is what they mean. In the US “fair use” allows for excerpts and thus you have a 300 word option in posting on FR, though for some it is 100 word. Yet many FReepers do not even most excerpts that provide the gist of the article, but lazily just post a sentence or two, thus requiring opening up even more links. https://wordcounter.net helps with the word count.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.