Here's a picture of Google's ad campaign in Berlin taxis, fighting German publishers' efforts to pass a law to charge for snippets of text. Earlier explanation here: https://plus.google.com/u/1/105076678694475690385/posts/BuMG7Ripsru
Ach, so eine Taxi-Fahrt kann einen ja ganz schön in Wallung bringen ...
71 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 20 previous comments
- gets a service without having to pay for it himself. How much would e.g. Google+ be worth to you?
The cab allegory would work better if the cab driver showed the passenger a selection of restaurant menus to choose restaurant from, and the restaurant wanted to charge the driver for this extra service. Noone prevents the customer to go straight to the restaurant (newspaper site) without sitting in the menu-presenting cab (going via Google). The newspaper sites need to examine why they do not.Feb 19, 2013
- (Your Quote) "Agree but does robot.txt stop advertisers or adwords links from being clicked. I dont think so."
Really? It's common sense, not a Google screwing content creators conspiracy: People who pay for adwords wanted to buy the adword.
A shame that common sense is so difficult to find in copyright discussions.
Why the hell would someone buy a sponsored search result for a search engine they did not want to be accessible from?! Google owes you nothing; if you bought adwords, you clearly felt like you owed them.
Seriously, just imagine the dummy who buys Google Adwords for a site all while voluntarily requesting for Google to not list it in search results. Who would do that? More importantly, why would Google owe them anything?Feb 19, 2013
- I think you guys are missing the point I made. The question we all should have is not how much free stuff you can get, or what Adwords provide, it should be how much your content is worth and why YOU do not have any control how its searched, indexed, or consumed online beyond what a handful of highly proprietary SE vendors decides. And why we all dont make more money off our content. Why is that income and control funneled to a handful of search engines and social media domains???
I am not demonizing Google or Facebook or any one vendor. But I am saying the web does not serve the User or content holders like it should.
What I am proposing is a "User Web" or a new model, where search is completely free of corporate control and controlled via open source search standards and where web site content holders and user data is managed and controlled exclusively by the user, you and I, not search engines and not social media. Call me a dreamer or an idiot. Its fine with me. But I am seeing more and more of these stories of publishers complaining about how their content is used online.
Its common sense that we should think of all sides of the problem and look at improvement, not just a blanket acceptance of the status quo.Feb 19, 2013
- Because you cannot make any income if no-one can find you.
What is happening is content creators are struggling with income, they look around and see profitable companies around them, and they struggle to convince themselves that they are being ripped off. They immediately latch on to excerpts to justify their feelings even their fear that users will just sit on Google's news page without clicking through any result is ridiculous.
And as for a “User Web”, think about it: if someone wants to find information, they cannot query themselves. Search directs a user to a resource when they feel incapable of finding it on their own. You will always need some standards bodies to control the method of discovery. Keeping it in a consortium helps prevent individual entities from pivoting in a way which breaks compatibility or freedom, but you are still headed in the direction the blob rolls.
Even if you have a completely decentralized P2P-based search index, you would still need some algorithm to browse it and some protocol to interface with it. Something, someone, or someones will always needs to make those.
You make an interesting grand-stand, but it does not attempt to be a solution to a problem: it attempts to sound like one.Feb 19, 2013
- The German courts would be wise to side against publishers, here... Were not even talking 'a page'of material here, are we? Also, awesome ad.Feb 19, 2013
- No offense but I better bow out of this discussion as we are talking about completely different subjects now. User Web is a web where search engines and social media pay us to use our content and we control our data in a central database.
As for the publisher question, under the current web we have now their only option is to let their links and content be controlled by search engines and give up that control like everyone else, unless they want create a subscription site behind a secure login.Feb 19, 2013