ps didn’t mean to not tag @timberners_lee if he cares to respond or I misinterpreted his position. But it certainly looks narrowly focused on the risk of payment for links spreading globally.
Show this thread
OK, I'm calling it. Founder of web's opposition to new Australia law - Facebook & Google are kicking & screaming over - was way overplayed likely by Google's lobby spreading to news outlets. He was focused only on payment for links (law doesn't do this) and hedged REPEATEDLY.pic.twitter.com/LEcnDmm9iy
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Okay- now I am confused. So Berners-Lee only got hooked into this one little part of the proposed regs? Nothing about the data-mining et al.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Agree that free links are an important part of the open web, but Google and FB’s entire business model is charging people for links. A bit rich for them to claim they should never have to pay for them.
-
And Facebook is the antithesis of the open web on top of that.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Hope they're aware that Tim's nonprofit, and hence his salary, are heavily funded by Google.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The code says that if you use a single hyperlink (an <a> tag) to a news article, you will be forced to pay news organisations. That is paying for linking. You need to be responsible and stop spreading misinformation.
-
I understand it says the news agency and internet platform will negotiate the terms of payment and only platforms with an oversized portion of the market would be subject to that requirement.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I’ll just leave this here. Yes, this does cover links. Sorry.pic.twitter.com/SvGPogaG9l
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.