Belgian Courts Insist Google Post Legal Ruling
from the so-much-for-Google's-clean-interface dept
Google is famous for the clean, barren look of its front page. It looks like they may be forced to lose that in Belgium. In the ongoing case where a bunch of newspaper publishers are trying to force Google to pay them to index them and send them traffic (a move that has search engine optimizers worldwide wondering what they could possibly be thinking), Google appealed both parts of the ruling. The bigger issue (the indexing and showing links to Belgian certain news sources) will be heard on appeal in November. However, on the issue of forcing Google to place the entire text of the legal order on the front of both google.be and news.google.be, the Belgian courts have turned down Google's appeal, and said they will start fining the company if it does not place the entire text (with no commentary, either) on both websites. This seems drastic and entirely unnecessary for a variety of reasons. All it really seems to do is broadcast the backwardness with which Belgian news publishers view the internet. It makes you wonder... do Belgian publishers require libraries to pay them extra money to list their books in a card catalog? What this really highlights, however, is that there are still plenty of industries out there that don't necessarily understand how the internet works -- and that can cause all sorts of problems for internet companies who assume most people understand when things are being done for their benefit. From a policy perspective, someone in Belgium might want to recognize how dangerous this ruling may be for its own industry. Even though it was made at the request of these Belgian newspapers, the long term effect could end up being quite damaging. Not only does it remove traffic to these sites, but it should also make any other search engine think twice before doing business in Belgium.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Pull out of the market
It's a small enough market, they don't have much to loose and they could set their proxy DNSes to re-direct .be IPs to google.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
F them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Breakfast of champions!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.inbev.com/brands/2__3__88__hoegaarden.cfm
Guess the marketing was pretty successfull. BTW, so is Stella Artois. In many markets, they are brewed locally rather than imported.
Chris.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
.be
That may be what the newspapers really want since Google will compete with the newspapers for Belgian advertising.
If Google has to post the decision and is not allowed to comment then two questions arise:
1. are they allowed to say that they have been ordered to not comment?
2. can they allow visitors to post comments?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The real answer is...
Now I am note sure how the judges are elected or appointed or what, but a move like that in the U.S. would be a RGE (Resume Generating Event) for Judges that are elected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The real answer is...
I actually think that that would be a good idea, but also remove the search bar and add in as many bandwidth-sucking items (flash, videos, high-resolution pictures, etc.) on the page as possible. They don't need to be visible, just make the page load slow as hell until they change the ruling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: industries out there that don't necessarily un
Please don't let me be the second person to make that remark...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
F 'em++
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Open thought to the Belgian news agencies
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: yea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the obvious answer?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
dumbass europeans
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: dumbass europeans
But this thing from the Belgians is just backwards and counterproductive. Dont these morons realise that some people spend hundreds of pounds, and many hours just trying to get great search engine rankings?
Google, just filter the whole Belgian press from your pages. Stuff'em I say, there are plenty of smaller owners, and probably Belgian bloggers who appretiate your attention, probably have a google ad bar, and wont try to sue your backside for linking to them. Look at it this way, who, bar the very small Belgian market, is actually interested in these poxy newspapers....
I would love to see how hits to their site tail off as they no longer come up in google searches or news, and as other search engines (Yahoo, MSN) etc catch on as well...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Belgian Ruling
It does seem a little surprising that Belgium would give out such a ruling. In the end, these sort of moves are going to do more to internationalize american news than they will protect individual foreign media interests.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Belgian Ruling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupid frog-like country
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lawyers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Compliance
If it's not specified in the ruling:
1. Display the ruling in such a small font that it looks like a smudge on the page.
2. Display the text as a continuious square boarder that spirals inward with the search field in the center.
3. Display the text as a background image with the standard Google page "floating" in front of it.
4. Fit the text to a standard Google page. Set the text color to white and with Google's standard white background there'd be nothing to see unless someone does a "select all".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Retaliation
I would also add a process, say a link at the bottom of the page, to allow any individual with a potentially blocked domain to submit documentation that they are not a business. You do not want to hurt the average citizen and it gives you one more screw to turn to escalate the situation should you need to escalate.
Even just blocking every media site in Belgium should get the media's attention at a minimum when they see traffic, and their ad revenue go down. Again, links are a two-way street. What these id10ts haven't figured out is that the internet is not a one-way transactional medium nor a zero-sum game. By adding value to the newspaper's sites, through links, Google should actually be charging the newspaper sites, not the other way around, and indeed, indirectly they do by showing advertising on the pages with the links to the newspaper's sites. It's a whole new market system, one not covered by any economic text I read when I was getting my degrees in the '90's.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Under these circumstances it could be impossible for Belgium to censor Google after that..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Retaliaton...
Google knows that, hopefully.
They know that the Belgian people are not represented by the Belgian government on this issue. So they'll do whatever they can to keep service operational for the Belgian people.
How would I apply the court order and still do no evil? I'd append the text to the main page page. It's only text, and people don't have to read it. If they scroll down far enough, then they can read it. However, they should comment on it anyways, but very, very slyly. They should use their adwords technology to 'comment' on it by having automatically generated, [i]algorithmically chosen[/i] links to reasons why it is invalid. For news.google.be, they should have a whole news section devoted to it, and the top articles would be chosen from blogs, from places like Techdirt.
Google would never have to say a word, but every Belgian would be able to find plenty of links to refute the court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Retaliaton...
Everyone is responsible for the actions of their own government, even if they do not agree with or support that government. No government can continue without the tacit support of the majority of the population and no government can continue in the face of the active opposition of 20% of the population.
If the Belgians don't like the government, it is up to them to change it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another Theory
Imagine a number of EU countries adopting the same policy, with only Quaero willing to the foot the bill to index the content. Taking this to its logical extreme, Quaero would become the European search engine of choice, able to index the non-european sites for free (as google does), but with the advantage of exclusive EU content.
In fact, I would hazard to say executing this strategy would be the only way to give Quaero a fighting chance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Another Theory
Great point. The thing I want to point out to everyone is that Google is a service, not a right. Googe is in the business of having as large an audience as it can, within reason. Most of the comments on this topic have centered on google "getting back" at Belgium either by pulling out, blocking .de content, or some weirdly childish thing like slowing down the google site itself. The idea is that the people will all rise up and say "I WANT MY GOOGLE!". How naive. The more realistic response is that anyone afftected will just use another search engine.
Take home messages
1) It is in Googles interest not to piss off the governments of countries whenever possible because it hurts the bottom line (ad sales).
2) As nice as google is, there are plenty of other seaarch engines that can do the job and would love to see it either banned or vountarily pulled out of markets, it makes their job easier.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE: Another Theory
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Another Theory
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Another Theory
Let's see
1) I don't believe I've ever met you so you have absolutely no idea what my "success" in business is or will be. For all you know, I could be a very successful businessman.
2) Since my thinking is so simplistic please regale us with your evolved and superior thoughts so that we all may learn. I was always taught that if you're going to spit venom like yours you should at least qualify it.
Unfortunately, some people who post anonymously are too imature to actually participate in an adult discussion of issues. That being said I welcome your intelligent response but expect your childish come upense about my intellect or spelling or something.
tick tock anonymous coward...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Posted
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Belgium court ruling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Belgium court ruling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
google
[ link to this | view in chronology ]