Oh, no – this is particularly troubling. I can understand that content owners and creators want to profit from their work. But the proposed solution of telling search engines to pay out profits to content creators, is a doubly bad idea. An initiative that needs to be stopped, and replaced with a more intelligent and more modern one. The internet information ecosystem isn’t perfect, and does need change, but destroying it completely won’t make things better.
First, it will either destroy the search engine business, or cause search engines to stop listing major publishers (causing them to cry out or at least allow relisting of their works without cost). Search engine optimization is a key marketing tool, and should be incorporated into business plans that way.
Second, it does not address the complexities that digital content creation involves: how do you deal with remixes, derivative works, and so on?
I think that what we need is an overhaul of the information ecosystem to reflect content ownership, change history, and fairly distribute profits as part of the business strategy of all parties involved, throwing current copyright ownership into the inspection mechanism and replacing it with a more up-to-date version reflecting critical issues sich as: Who is the content owner? For what purpose has the content owner shared their content? How are derivative works, and derivative contributors, fairly compensated and attributed? What exactly is being sold, and how does the service offered and user demand relate to what the contributor has contributed?
Julia Reda – Ancillary Copyright 2.0: The European Commission is preparing a frontal attack on the hyperlink
The European Commission is preparing a frontal attack on the hyperlink, the basic building block of the Internet as we know it. This is based on an absurd idea that just won’t die: Making search engines and news portals pay media companies for promoting their freely accessible articles.