Google Explains How To Kill The Internet In Australia: Just Make Proposed Changes To Copyright Laws
from the just-what-everyone-didn't-need dept
Down in Australia they've been looking at updating their copyright laws to catch up to the digital age (read: to make the laws more favorable for an entertainment industry that refuses to adjust to the market), but seem to be doing so in a way that pretty much guarantees the opposite would occur. For example, one of the changes would effectively require search engines to ask permission of every web page they indexed. It's one of those "sounds good in theory" ideas that is ridiculous in practice, and would pretty much make it impossible to have a search engine in Australia. Google has submitted their own take on this law, explaining why it would push Australia into "pre-internet" days. This is the type of lawmaking that happens when lawmakers rely too much on a single industry (in this case, the entertainment industry) to detail the "problems" of the internet. It doesn't take into account what's really going on, or the fact that the complaining industry needs to learn how to adjust to the new technology -- not beg for laws that hold back the technology.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
...So the search engine company would be familiar with every single web page indexed? They'd have to email xxxbestialityinspace.com for permission to link to them? That's silly.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
How do you spell clueless again? How about competence? Does this thing have any chance to pass as a law? Is there any hope for the human race?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Why Australia has to go Europe's heavy on copyright way beats comprehension.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Just plain stupid
If the proposed changes go through then the Aussies deserve to lose the internet. These changes are just plain stupid, especially the one about requiring permission from a web site before a search engine can index it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Makes pefect sense
The law could just require every webserver(just ask the hosting company) to come with a deny to all in the robots.txt file by default , and the user has to change the file or ask specifically for the "indexed package" in order to get indexed by the SEs.
This way you get indexed only if you want to, and the search engines enjoy a sort of protection from idiotic claims.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
God damnit
Our politicians seriously have no clue. What the hell is wrong with them?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Since when is google the internet?
There seem to be two kinds of people: those who know that the internet is not the same as the world wide web and those that don't.
To the latter, google is the dot-com that could. The ultimate triumph of the new economy over the old. The promise of a never-ending wealth engine powered by synergies of combining content producers and consumers. Go go gooooogle!
To the former, google and advertising-funded-searching is just the most recent manifestation of a much larger cultural information structure that reinvents itself every decade or so as those who produce information adapt to the ever evolving market defined by the tastes of those that consume it.
If google can't index others content without their permission, some pretty straightforward deals will be made and someone will make some money getting the content people want will get to those who want it. If google chooses not to be that person then someone else will, life will continue and the internet will keep humming along as it has for the past 30+ years.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Hahahahah... NO.
Next thing you know users will need the web site's permission to download their content and browse their site.
And if their computer leaves a copy of the images downloaded in it's cache then they can be dragged off to prison for copyright infringement.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
It would make no difference
As pointed out WWW is just an Internet service. And it is not the main vessel for copyright infringement. P2P networks are.
However politicians think they can make rules without really being aware on the effects of the laws.
A new law in Greece banned accidentally (?) all electronic & electromechanical games throughout the country and that included game consoles, computers (in a way) and the lot!
Needless to say the law was never pursued.
http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,57305,00.html
for more info.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
How would they accomplish this?
What about web pages that don't have any contact information?
Sure they could track down whois information for domains in order to contact, but what about services that offer web hosting without a personal domain?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
If people don't want their sites indexed.
Then make it so that the content can't be indexed.
This isn't hard to do.
Has everybody forgotten about robots.txt?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
robots.txt
No, not everyone has forgetton about robots.txt. Specifically post #5, where Shohat specifically talks about robot.txt :D
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Just plain stupid
omg...unless Australia also gets its own big wall'o'fire to block themselfs off from the rest of the world, everybody would know that instead of going to google.au, going to google.com would already solve their problems. Australian laws still aint European, Asian, African or American laws.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
lol australia will shoot themselves.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
ahem... I guess the google element in this headline was just to guarantee a few more clicks.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
thank you anon
Thank you anon. You made a very clear and accurate point about the internet and unfortunatly you are right. I would have made the point myself, but you beat me to it! :P
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Another silly law, eh? Shades of Belgium...
If this passes, then maybe what Google should do is simply remove all Australian websites from their index and not bother asking "permission" to reindex them. A few years of nobody being able to find them online should change this type of thinking.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Coming soon to US
I'm sure that a whole room of senators just smacked themselves on the forehead and went Doh!
It's these type of narrowminded ideas that waste time and will get nowhere in the end. It doesn't matter about robots.txt to some people, they want a law on the books.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
If this became law, Australian government would require Google to remove everything with a .au or.com. A company with a .com website, and from another country can file a grievance with the Australian government that Google is indexing there content against Australian law. So yes, this would put Australians back to the stone age. I think it's dumb, really dumb. If you don't want people searching for your webpage, then why even have one.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
"If you don't want people searching for your webpage, then why even have one."
Because it makes me feel special and like some one cares but I have no type of counter so when no one views it I will not feel bad about my self
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
WTF Mate?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
we already have this
it's called robots.txt and it explicitly lets me forbid a search engine from indexing my website if I so choose.
Is it not safe to assume that if I haven't said "don't index me" that I'm ok with you indexing me?
It works, really!! Why haven't any of these belgiums or australians heard of it?
Ignorance of the law is no excuse in a criminal case, so ignorance of robots.txt shouldn't be an excuse here either.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
WTH?!
As permission of *every* website indexed or just those that have a copyright? Just posting a website does not imply it has a copyright does it? What about forums, chats, etc ...
And how exactly does this benefit the entertainment industry?
I'm confused ... *sigh*
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Well, in another one of the colonies we passed the DMCA, and COPPA, and CAN SPAM, and...
Well, you get the picture.
Don't underestimate any country's mentally retarded politicians.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
a new spin
this sounds like tracking people activities just with a new spin. here in amorica i think it is less about protecting their property and more about big bother and big business control everyone. finally here more people are opening their mouths and saying no more. just hope that it is not too late here.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Ridiculous
well... when i first heard of this new australian law story i laughed so hard thinking that it was simply ridiculous, and now that i see it everywere i wanted to write that i've heard of stupid "theorical" internet laws... and this one... so i'm gonna have to hope that the google law team can make an effort to win this case
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Im gonna have to agree totally with you here
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Idiots
Let's expand this to B&M world. If a person wants to look into a store window, he or she has to ask permission of the store owner. He or she has to ask permission of the store owner first before stepping into the store in blindfold in case the permissiong to look in store is denied.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Australian Politicians
have made a specialty over the years of writing the most boneheaded internet legislation on the planet.
There was a totally idiotic attempt to xcensor the net a fe years ago and, along with tis madness, they are also planning to Tax Aussies who earn linden $$ on Second Life.
Plainly things are just so perfect here that these guys have nothing better to do than come up with laws that make netizens go hyukhyukhyuk
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
What do you expect? This is the same government that continues to support Bush's excellent Iraqi adventure even after practically everyone else has peeled off from that ill-conceived coalition. Goes to show how bright they are.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment