Shared publicly  - 
A crazy ill-defined proposed law in Germany that would limit search engines like Google -- and maybe social networks -- and maybe even bloggers -- from linking to news content without express permission took another step forward yesterday.
Sebastian Socha's profile photoAbi Hud's profile photoDanny Sullivan's profile photoDurant Imboden's profile photo
Why don't they all stop linking and then listen to the news sites scream bloody murder when their viewership goes down because people that would never have visited their sites are no longer being exposed to stories on those sites.
That is crazy! If they don't want the content indexed it's very easy to just block the search engines from accessing to the content. And what about linking to them? I guess these people have a lot of power and influence on things they don't understand.
So they want news publishers to get even less traffic?
There's no way to easily do this. It's easier just to shut down connections from Germany, and then Germany will go back to the dark ages of the Internet.

Good plan, government.
They want the traffic, but they want it for free ... as in internet everything should be for free.... ;)
+Kyle Jensen - Yup, (Internet - Germany) would be the net result.
Pun intended.
Peope are discussing the same kind of stupid law in France. I kind of want that to pass though just to see them start crying the week after and begging Google (and others) to index them again!
Unbelievable. There are still quite a lot of privacy policies I see on websites where they say you cannot link to our news within permission. People to step out of the 1980s.
ha, I couldn't care less. teh news ist just copied from american sites and then translated. big whoopie
+Line Bell sure... and the russian news are just translated copies from the german news... and the chinese do just translate those russian news... O_o and you know what? The Australians re-translate these chinese news into australian english...
The practical effect of such a law would be to boost traffic for the big-name publishers (who'd know how to opt in) at the expense of smaller bloggers and publishers (who might not understand how to opt in or might not have an easy way of doing so unless Google and other search engines built "opt in" into their Webmaster tools).

It seems to me that this law would give Google--the leading search engine--a perfect justification for PFI (pay for inclusion). Google could impose a sliding scale of service fees for German publishers who wanted to be included in its Google News results, starting at zero for very small publishers, bloggers, etc. and rising to, say, 100,000 euros a month for megapublishers like Springer. Google could justify this by saying that it would help to level the playing field while protecting free access to a wide variety of news sites and blogs by the German public. 
+Durant Imboden It would give them that excuse and those advantages. And it's notable that despite this, they're fighting the law.
Maybe they shouldn't have caved when the Belgian newspaper publishers demanded payoffs.In December, Jeff John Roberts wrote a piece for titled "Did Google pay Belgian newspapers a $6M copyright fee? Sure looks like it." In it, he said:"The that the rest of Europe will soon be beating a path to Google’s door demanding similar payouts." (Soon? They already are.)
Add a comment...