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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
[+] [-] spindritf|11 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] Udo|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pyneapple_tree|11 years ago|reply
Google+, Twitter, Facebook and other social networks won't be subject to this tax.
[+] [-] balls187|11 years ago|reply
Google would presumably stop returning results for Spanish content to avoiding getting charged, resulting in dropped traffic, and less ad dollars.
[+] [-] x0x0|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mvid|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] snvzz|11 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] _up|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chiubaka|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] toqueteos|11 years ago|reply
It's ridiculous how fucking idiotic our politicians can be and people still keep voting them.
EDIT: Typo.
[+] [-] TazeTSchnitzel|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ytifle|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] eng_monkey|11 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] Vik1ng|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] currysausage|11 years ago|reply
More 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.
[+] [-] mahouse|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mathetic|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] w1ntermute|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Udo|11 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] lince|11 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] Daishiman|11 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] tormeh|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] marak830|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pyneapple_tree|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] outside1234|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikeash|11 years ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] coder23|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MarkMc|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wmf|11 years ago|reply