Slashdot Mirror


Google Begins Removing AFP From Google News

An anonymous reader writes "Google has began removing web-based content of Paris-Based news agency Agence France Presse (AFP), from the Google News service. This past weekend we reported that the Agence France Presse had sued Google for displaying their photo's, stories, and news headlines on Google News without permission. AFP is seeking damages of around $17.5 million and requested the courts that Google News is not to display any of its copyrighted material. It appears Google is complying with what the AFP is requesting. Google doesn't have a timetable for when all AFP links and content will be removed from Google News, but the company is actively working on the matter, said Steve Langdon, a Google spokesman."

76 of 403 comments (clear)

  1. make your mind up by drxray · · Score: 5, Funny

    AFP or APF or FP?

    --
    Slashdot - Mutual Assured Discussion
    1. Re:make your mind up by michaeltoe · · Score: 2, Funny

      PBJ!

    2. Re:make your mind up by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Funny
      AFP or APF or FP?

      At least it's not Alt.Fan.Pratchett

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  2. Good move by bogaboga · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Good move Google but what happens if every news organization sues or threatens to sue? Where shall we get our news from?

    1. Re:Good move by anonicon · · Score: 5, Funny

      You kids today, with your online THIS and convergence THAT, you don't know how good you've got it. Back in my day, we hiked six miles through the trees and snow and mud to our mailbox, and we were grateful! We also had to pay for the damn thing, $0.10 a day, whether we got it or not because our thieving neighbors stole it from off our fenceline, and most of the time there was a little news and whole lot of ads.

      Ungrateful slackers, the lot of you.

    2. Re:Good move by Maestro4k · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Good move Google but what happens if every news organization sues or threatens to sue? Where shall we get our news from?
      • From the news organizations that realize being listed on Google News or other news aggregators (such as Topix.net) is beneficial to them because it directs users to their websites.
      • The ones who don't get this concept will just quietly go under or be bought up by other news organizations that "get it". This is exceptionally silly on AFP's part since once a user clicks on a link from Google News to go to AFP's site they can display banner ads to help pay their costs.

        Looks like this will be one of those cases where the company deserves exactly what it's asking for. I wonder how they'll try to spin their declining web readership?

    3. Re:Good move by secolactico · · Score: 5, Funny

      we hiked six miles through the trees and snow and mud to our mailbox, and we were grateful!

      You forgot: "uphill both ways"

      --
      No sig
    4. Re:Good move by baldass_newbie · · Score: 5, Funny

      Judging by your spelling, you are definitely a product of the fine Philadelphia school system.

      Pray tell, which school did you attend? Bok?

      --
      The opposite of progress is congress
    5. Re:Good move by mbrewthx · · Score: 2, Funny

      Thank You!!!
      I resemble that remark..

      Warren G Harding Jr High on Tarrsdale ave.

      --
      __________ Leave me alone I'm compiling a RPG II program on my S/36...Thanks to metamucil I'm a Regular Meta Moderator
    6. Re:Good move by SeventyBang · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not every source will do so unless they want $$$ for people to read their online material. Some are doing that right now. see: Wall Street Journal. Sure, there's a free story here & there, but they want to restrict content to subscribers.

      Papers which have less than the WSJ's stature pretty much know they are leaping from shrinking pond to shrinking pond. Paid readership is dropping....fast. And they don't have a solution. They know they have to have an online presence in order to compete against everyone else who knows they need to be online. And if they aren't online, most people aren't going to follow that newspaper.
      The bottom line is those (readers) who are online will read online - in many cases moreso than hardcopy; especially if it's free. Those who aren't wired aren't in a number big enough to keep the paper in business across the long haul.

      I have a silly question:
      what are "photo's"? (see main /. story)

    7. Re:Good move by Pxtl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thinking it over, Google is quite definitely copying some of their content, so any organisation on google news can C&D google for this. Still, any news organisation that makes money from website hits would be stupid to do so, as Google is probably one of their biggest referrers.

    8. Re:Good move by DoctorHibbert · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dude, they're French. They care not about readership, they are heavily subsidized by the French gonvernment.

      --
      Arbitrary sig
    9. Re:Good move by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From the news organizations that realize being listed on Google News or other news aggregators (such as Topix.net) is beneficial to them because it directs users to their websites.

      AFP doesn't want users directed to their website. Their business model is damaged by direct customer interaction: they want users directed to the websites of newspapers who reproduce their stories, and that won't happen if viewers can see the original source indexed alongside all the paying clones.

      Who will decide to go read more ads and intrusive branding, when you can get the original just as easily?

    10. Re:Good move by forgetful_ca · · Score: 2, Funny

      If I were you, living in the states, I would be careful mentioning 'jhad'ing anything.

    11. Re:Good move by mbaciarello · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, yes... Yet, I can't see their point.

      1. AFP is hurt in its sales because Google lets end-users get their news for free, so that they don't flock any longer to sites which buy news from AFP. I can see how going up against Google may be useful there, yet wouldn't it be faster and more effective to "secure" your own site? i.e.requiring registration etc...

      2. AFP is hurt by other commercial sites getting and reproducing AFP news for free, and displaying them. Alright, teach'em a lesson by suing Google. Then again, I've never heard a news agency having these kinds of problems, as there are usually many value-added services clients get when they subscribe to services - such as actual "real time" news feeds.

      3. At least according to Wikipedia, AFP is a government-subsidized news agency whose most important market is an artificial one -- i.e. France, where it's the "official" agency. Why go after Google like you were a real company, aggressively protecting your fictitious market?

      It seems to me as though they're looking for additional funding for fiscal 2005, more than protecting a supposed market... After all we all have national budget problems in the EU (and not only there...)

    12. Re:Good move by mikkom · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can't undestand why everyone gets this so wrong.

      News agencies sell their news and images to magazines and get most of their money from there. They employ a horde of reporters around the world to write news to them. Why would they want one publication to copy their news and photos and use them without payment?

      Also, please back your claim and post a link to information that tells how much of their money comes from French goverment.

    13. Re:Good move by emilymildew · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My commute to work right now -is- uphill both ways. I told my father about it, and he asked how that was possible.

      Uh. I have to go up a hill to get there, and then back down the other side?

      My kids are never going to believe me.

    14. Re:Good move by FictionPimp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ok, this makes no sense.

      I own a news site, and I buy a story from the AFP I'm not allowed to be on google news. But I want to be on google news because it brings traffic to my website.

      Maybe the AFP should tell the people who buy its storys not to put them out on a public internet. Sure google shows an image and a blurb of text, but to read the whole story you still have to go to the website that actually published it.

      If this is true, then the failing is in the aFP's buisness model and not google news, google is just providing an index of news sites based on my keyword search.

  3. Just to be safe by crow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just to be safe, Google should remove all AFP sites not only from news, but from all portions of Google. Google certainly wouldn't want to risk further harm to AFP by keeping them in any of their indexes.

    1. Re:Just to be safe by Stop+Error · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was just going to say that. Why are they suing Google who is giveing them more exposure and potentially widening there audience?

      --
      No keyboard detected. Press any key to continue.
    2. Re:Just to be safe by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      why? because they're a news organization. they get money from selling the stories(and associated photos), not from giving them away for free so that another organization can get the ad revenue as well without paying them anything.

      i'm pretty sure they would have happily sold the stuff to google under normal terms...

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:Just to be safe by Frodo+Crockett · · Score: 2, Insightful

      why? because they're a news organization. they get money from selling the stories(and associated photos), not from giving them away for free so that another organization can get the ad revenue as well without paying them anything. Excuse me? Google News is a free service, with no ads whatsoever. As others have pointed out, the only ones to lose revenue from this will be the AFP.

      --
      "The newly born animals are then whisked off for a quick run through a giant baking oven." --heard on Food Network
  4. Please get it right..... by wpiman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Congress passed a law... it is now referred to as the Agence FREEDOM Presse... Please update the submission.

  5. Featured on Google a bad thing? by bryan8m · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would think that the news agency would want to be featured on Google to attract more visitors to its site! Apparently they are simply out for money when no damage has actually been done. Sure it's copyrighted material...

  6. Sucks for AFP by PxM · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think this is a case of a dinosaur making last ditch efforts to try to save themself from certain destruction. AFP wants to try to control the flow of news (from them to other newspapers) and defend the natural monopolies involved with physical media since it's hard for customers to compare items for free. Now that AFP isn't listed, customers will just see other sites and flock to them first. This is what happens when you apply the old methods of business to the new world.

    --
    Want a free iPod?
    Or try a free Nintendo DS, GC, PS2, Xbox. (you only need 4 referrals)
    Wired article as proof

    1. Re:Sucks for AFP by jen729w · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Er... "dinosaur"? "Certain destruction"? "Old methods of business"?

      Listen, e-vangelising is all well and good - sometimes. Other times, we actually *need* these old-methods companies. Say AFP folds; who, then, gathers the news which Google collates? Google sure as hell doesn't. They index, and that's all.

      AFP, BBC, ABC, Reuters; whatever, whoever: the fact is, these organisations are essential if we are to continue to receive cutting-edge, informative news from around the world.

      AFP doesn't want to "defend a natural monopoly". It wants to ensure that it obtains sufficient revenue to allow it to continue to pay its journalists, without whom Google News would be largely pointless.

  7. Google's revenge... by jromz03 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Will probably to sink AFP into the very very bottom of search results if not absent totally. AFP might have the right, but I'm sure they know the consequences of dealing with the #1 search engine.

  8. Biting the Hand that Feeds them. by trevdak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This scene is somewhat reminiscent of the scene from the Incredibles where victims of crimes start suing the superheroes for helping them.

    Google has become the doorway to the internet. Your site doesn't exist until Google indexes it. Anyone who sues them isn't trying to prevent copyright infringement or reproduction of their data, they are most likely looking for a reason to press charges and make a quick franc.

    1. Re:Biting the Hand that Feeds them. by goon+america · · Score: 5, Informative

      AFP doesn't make money of its web site... they make money from selling news pictures (to other web sites).

      A lot of people seem to think that google was taking pictures from the AFP web site, and AFP sued them for it. That's not what happened. AFP sells a picture to, say, the New York Times. The Times puts this picture on the NYT site with the caption, "Photo by whoever, copyright 2005 Agency France Presse." Google then then takes this picture from the NYT site and puts it on the Google News front page. It has nothing to do with Google indexing the AFP site.

    2. Re:Biting the Hand that Feeds them. by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Interesting

      OK so this is the umpteenth comment modded up that says the same thing: that afp needs google more than google needs afp. newsflash: THAT'S NOT TRUE.

      go to afp's homepage. you still think they rely on google for anything? that they want flocks of end-users(consumers) flocking to their site? no. that's not their business. check their 'products' and ask yourself is anyone coming through google likely to shell out money for something titled 'AFP's "ready-to-run" package in Flash format offers complete coverage of the the 2005 Formula 1 racing season'. they don't sell to users reading google news, they sell content for services like google news(and newspapers and whatever).

      they're protecting their customers(and so their income source) with this move, if anything.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  9. Serves Google Right! by neoform · · Score: 2, Funny

    ..for promoting their news site! Geez, who does google think they are?

    --
    MABASPLOOM!
  10. In the words of Robin Williams... by XeroPurpose · · Score: 2, Funny

    "...I do it because I am French. I am a bad mother fucker, am I not?"

  11. Google should apologise. by Neoncow · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe something like,
    We are very very sorry for linking to you from our side of the interweb. Rest assured, Google.com will never link to your site again.

    Have a nice day.

    1. Re:Google should apologise. by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To be fair, agencies like AFP don't rely (or even need) on traffic to their own Web sites. They make all their money by selling their feeds and licencing their articles to other publications which then go out and make the money on advertising, etc. I doubt it'd hit the AFP much (or any agency) if their own sites were totally blacklisted by Google.

    2. Re:Google should apologise. by mcc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well I can't help but wonder if the AFP's customers-- you know, the actual news sites google links-- are going to be particularly happy that that the AFP just got them blacklisted from google.

      I mean, if I ran a news site of some sort, and I found that one of my content providers was engaging in direct and successful lobbying efforts to get me kicked off google news because I'd been buying content from them, I'd definitely start looking for an alternate provider for that content immediately.

    3. Re:Google should apologise. by natrius · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And if France (and Germany, I haven't forgot them either when they harrassed Yahoo! and eBay) doesn't stop this practice of trying to make American companies subject to their wierd laws it is getting time to just pull the fibers connecting France to the rest of the world.

      The lawsuit was filed in America.

  12. Just goes to show. by sammy+baby · · Score: 5, Funny

    Whatver reputation the French may have in the US as "cheese-eating surrender monkeys," this incident proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that when carrying a firearm, the French will not hesitate to use deadly force against their own feet.

    1. Re:Just goes to show. by sammy+baby · · Score: 2, Funny

      Because I'm funnier?

      (And also: who are you suggesting I'm racist against? Normans? Caucasians generally?)

    2. Re:Just goes to show. by Brandybuck · · Score: 2, Funny
      Reminds me of the Hartlepool Monkey.

      During the Napoleonic Wars there was a fear of a French invasion of Britain and much public concern about the possibility of French infiltrators and spies.

      The fishermen of Hartlepool fearing an invasion kept a close watch on the French vessel as it struggled against the storm but when the vessel was severely battered and sunk they turned their attention to the wreckage washed ashore. Among the wreckage lay one wet and sorrowful looking survivor, the ship's pet monkey dressed to amuse in a military style uniform.

      The fishermen apparently questioned the monkey and held a beach-based trial. Unfamiliar with what a Frenchman looked like they came to the conclusion that this monkey was a French spy and should be sentenced to death. The unfortunate creature was to die by hanging, with the mast of a fishing boat (a coble) providing a convenient gallows.
      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  13. But to actually read the whole story... by PaulBu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... one would have to click on it, and whatever ads they are paid for will show up. Quoting 4 lines of what they say within the context of a story should fall under "fair use", IMHO.

    I think it is more of a move to discourage "checking news online" in general, not that potential reader is directed to their website through google...

    Paul B.

  14. You're all ignoring one thing by VeryProfessional · · Score: 4, Insightful

    AFP make their money by selling their stories to other media organizations. If they allow their news to be disseminated without the appropriate fee being paid (as Google News is doing), they will be cutting off their main source of revenue.

    All AFP is doing is using legitimate means to protect a legitimate business model.

    1. Re:You're all ignoring one thing by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All AFP is doing is using legitimate means to protect a legitimate business model.

      Legitimate means would be not posting these articles on publicly accessible systems if they don't want the public to access them.

  15. It's AFP, not APF by kriston · · Score: 4, Informative

    Am I missing some obvious reason that you're using AFP and APF acronyms interchangeably? The wire service's name is AFP.

    --

    Kriston

  16. Google should remove all links to them by MarkWatson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Teach those assholes a lesson. Really, Google linking to them looked to me like FAIR USE that could only improve traffic to the French news site - and the news site's profits!

    I can not imagine how the Google News links could do anything but help make more profit for news sites that Google links to.

    Google News could link to my sites anyday - I will not complain :-)

  17. Re:AFP will now disappear by VeryProfessional · · Score: 2, Informative

    How else will anyone find them excpept through google.

    AFP are a newswire service. That means they make ther money by selling copy to other news organizations. Professional journalists hardly need to use Google news to be aware of the existence of (despite all the /. snideness) one of the worlds premier news agencies.

  18. Heh? Well back in my day... by mas5353 · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's nothin'! At least you had paper! Back in my day, we had to carve into stone tablets if we wanted to write something down. We had to carve rocks just to carve into rocks! You kids and your email and your gmail and your paper mail... In my day, if we wanted to send someone a message we had to train Carrier Pterodactyls. You have no idea how rough it was... they had to pick up our messages and drop them at the right cave. Do you have any idea how many of us were killed just as a result of Pterodactyls just dropping news tablets???

    --
    How long must we be a victim of fate and circumstance?
    As long as it takes to change our minds.
  19. Other news sites removed by Google by Percent+Man · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Google also, and much more quietly, is removing the National Vanguard, known as a racist neo-Fascist organization, from its list of news sources. This raises the question, how the heck did a site like National Vanguard (no, I won't link to it) wind up on Google's list of news sources in the first place?

    And the battle between the good of free speech and the good of shutting up morons continues...

    1. Re:Other news sites removed by Google by hyperstation · · Score: 4, Insightful

      for the sake of the free press, i would think National Vanguard should stay.

      but of course, that would make me a great big evil racist...

  20. Splitters!!! by pavon · · Score: 2, Funny

    That is all.

  21. Good lord by mcc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they allow their news to be disseminated without the appropriate fee being paid (as Google News is doing),

    If a link, a headline and a half-paragraph quotation is "disseminating", we're all fucked.

    Can't wait to see where we go next with this amazing new logic. "Amazon.com book reviews banned in france because people were quoting sentences from the books they reviewed, the book companies make their money by selling those books to customers, if they allow those sentences to be disseminated without the appropriate fee (as amazon.com book reviewers do) they will be cutting off their main source of revenue"...

  22. Re:When you're wrong, become insulting by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Insightful

    *AFP is now officially irrelevant. If you're not on Google, you simply don't exist.*

    is that so? so everybody stops buying from de facto newswire because it's not on google news, which doesn't really matter at all in the 'rest of the world'?

    btw you don't know jack about history apparently either, so I guess partially to blame why you don't understand shit about the oldest news agency in the world...

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  23. Google using AFP photos without attribution by Bushcat · · Score: 4, Informative
    If one reads the complaint (link below), points 28 onwards demonstrate that Google is using AFP's photos without attribution: in other words, for each news item, the news source is identified. However, for the photos, the photo source is NOT identified. So, AFP's photos are used without the site visitor being aware that the photos are from AFP. Also, AFP distributes its photos with a copyright line at the top of the image and several lines of descriptive text at the bottom of the image. When the images are used by Google, these lines have been automagically stripped out.

    Everyone loves Google, so it's easy to mock AFP. But if this were being done by a site that everyone loves to hate, I think people would tend to side with AFP.

    As a side note, Agence France Presse is one of the Big Three (with AP and Reuters). It takes great pride in the quality of its photography.

    http://www.resourceshelf.com/legaldocs/afpvgoogle1 .pdf

  24. Re:But isn't Reuters.... by Bushcat · · Score: 4, Informative
    ...Reuters = liberal, French media outlet

    British. Although the world's largest news outlet, 90% of its revenues come from selling financial data.

  25. Internet : the Level Playing Ground? by SluttyButt · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Apparently not as the AFP sees it. Having the ability to scour the playing ground at speed and unmatched power, it's inevitable the Google will dominate the Net. When that happens, it runs into opportunities untold, and the lesser players who might be a leader in its own right (e.g. AFP) sees that as a right to protect its ground in the open arena.

    Ultimately Search Engines' business is to provide information for consumers, and providing that information can come in a variety of manners the consumers are comfortable with e.g., Google News. Having the ability to scour and reporting the most arresting of subjects is seen as a threat to others focussing on narrower subjects.

    Instead of copyrighting its subject matters, entities like AFP could and SHOULD leverage on the Internet's openness and exposure to enhance its core subject matter, integrity, and prospect as an attractive business liaisons with consumers.

    Likewise, for the big players, they need to take similar notes. If you accepted that this is level playing ground, and small players emerging with much more speed and flexibility that you may have, then having the same integrity and rules applied, you should not switch stands and whine about small players stealing from your treasure chests when all is done and considered fair game based on consumers dogged ingenuity.

    Think, make not laws that goverened only your own interests.

  26. Re:AFP will now disappear by jen729w · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh god... please... stop this. AFP is a massive, globally recognised news organisation. Just because they're not on Google News doesn't mean they will sink into a void. The French - to their enormous credit - are fiercely nationalistic. You're not French (forgive the assumption, but I'm fairly sure it's valid) and therefore have no idea as to the scope of AFP's influence within France. It's like saying "if the BBC refuse to allow Google to index their content, BBC News will disappear within a month!!". Utter, complete nonsense. As a Brit, news.bbc.co.uk is the only news source I check. Google News can go jump. The whole world does not think like you, America. Sorry if that upsets you.

  27. Before anyone starts talking about fair use... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
    You don't even need to get that far to see that Google will win. Here are four reasons why:

    1. If you don't want a search engine spidering your pictures and news stories, don't put them on the web. If AFP were paper only, Google could not violate their copyright. It saves AFP money to stay offline.
    2. If AFP decides to pay to go online to make money, they should know the rules of the Internet. First rule about search engines like Google: robots.txt. If they don't want Google to spider them, any half-decent Internet expert they hire would be able to keep Google out of their webspace in the time it takes to type

      User-agent: *
      Disallow: /

      AFP didn't do their homework, and that's a poor way to protect any investment.

    3. Speaking of investments, even if they somehow managed to stay completely ignorant of search engine operation, anyone who wants to sell something online needs to protect it. This is as easy as adding password accounts. Other online news services do just that.
    4. Copyright protects the rights of authors so that they can make money. Why should we give them the benefit of governmental protection when it's obvious they don't care about protecting the content themselves enough to use basic measures to do so?

    To sum up: AFP, of their own volition, paid to get on the web. They completely ignored RFCs. They ignored standard practices by established companies in their business sector. They wait until $17M in damages accrue, which doesn't happen overnight. Only then do they cry foul, and sue using copyright law to protect something they won't protect themselves when they have the chance. If you were a judge, which way would you rule?

    Notice that I didn't even need to talk about fair use rights. France doesn't use the US Constitution. My arguments are purely economic, and I'm fairly sure the French understand money. If any lawyers at Google are reading this, please fight this suit. AFP are being unreasonable, and need to be taught a lesson.

    1. Re:Before anyone starts talking about fair use... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If you don't want a search engine spidering your pictures and news stories, don't put them on the web. If AFP were paper only, Google could not violate their copyright. It saves AFP money to stay offline.

      This isnt about the images and content being taken from the AFP website, this is about AFP images and content on OTHER news sites such as the BBC, NYTimes etc appearing on Google News with the attributions stripped.

      If you take a look at the AFP website, you will see that their website, while having a little news content, does not revolve around presenting news to the public.

      If AFP decides to pay to go online to make money, they should know the rules of the Internet. First rule about search engines like Google: robots.txt. If they don't want Google to spider them, any half-decent Internet expert they hire would be able to keep Google out of their webspace in the time it takes to type

      If you look at their robots.txt it contains the following:

      User-Agent: *
      Disallow: /beta
      Disallow: /francais/news
      Disallow: /english/news
      Disallow: /espanol/news
      Disallow: /arabic/news
      Which I think is more than enough.
      Speaking of investments, even if they somehow managed to stay completely ignorant of search engine operation, anyone who wants to sell something online needs to protect it. This is as easy as adding password accounts. Other online news services do just that.

      Dealt with above, this is about reuse without attribution, which is NOT covered by any meaning of the term 'fair use'.

      Copyright protects the rights of authors so that they can make money. Why should we give them the benefit of governmental protection when it's obvious they don't care about protecting the content themselves enough to use basic measures to do so?

      My god, you have a perverted and thoroughly wrong view of copyright and the protections granted to it. The whole point of copyright is that YOU DO NOT REQUIRE other protection, it SHOULD be publically available with no threat of copyrights being stripped just because someone else decided to use your content and you sued to stop them.

      By taking this action against Google, they are doing exactly what you want them to do, protect their copyrights. Copyright is granted so that works do not spend eternity in someones private collection never to be seen by the public. It grants the holders protection so that others can see the content.

  28. Re:AFP will now disappear by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "As a Brit, news.bbc.co.uk is the only news source I check."

    And people say Americans don't look close enough at things outside the US for thier own good.

    The BBC is good, but like CNN and Reuters, it can not be considered good enough to be the only source of news for a person.

    Not only am I an American, I'm one of those terrible "neo-con" "red-staters". You know the type of person that is working for a Jewish cabel and watches nothing but Fox News and listens to Limbaugh all the time.

    In my News Menu
    http://www.drudgereport.com/
    http://www.sla shdot.org/
    http://www.jpost.com/
    http://www.maar ivintl.com/index.cfm
    http://www.haaretzdaily.com/
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/
    http://www.a rabnews.com/
    http://www.dailystar.com.lb/
    http:/ /news.bbc.co.uk/
    http://www.cia.gov/cia/publicati ons/factbook/index .html
    http://news.google.com/
    http://www.gulf-da ily-news.com/home.asp
    http://news.ft.com/home/us

    It's Israeli and Middle East heavy because that's my speciality, well Ottoman 16th century till now in the Middle East.

    I check all of those at least once a day.

  29. Look, get the story right, dammit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    This is exceptionally silly on AFP's part since once a user clicks on a link from Google News to go to AFP's site they can display banner ads to help pay their costs.

    AFP's business model isn't to run a service to deliver news to readers directly. What they do is sell content to news organizations. This means that if you run a newspaper, you pay AFP for the right to reprint their stories.

    Google is getting the AFP content from these newspapers as a third party, and not as a subscriber to AFP, who probably don't give a rat's ass at the moment about making you go over to their site. You, as an individual who reads the news, are not their customer.

    1. Re:Look, get the story right, dammit. by lgw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You, as an individual who reads the news, are not their customer.

      Individuals who read the news are not the customers of any news outlet. This is a fundamental mistake. Individuals who read the news are the product, sold to the advertisers who are the actual customer.

      News outlets exist to bring eyeballs to advertisers at a profit, no different from any other form of for-profit media.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  30. They're thumbnails. by mcc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The thumbnails all directly link to the place where they appeared, where the copyright line may be clearly seen in full. Whether that line is visible on google news doesn't matter; the courts at least in America seem to have been pretty clear that if you thumbnail an image linked somewhere else and link the original, this isn't publishing and any copyright issues that image may hold aren't relevant because only the actual host is publishing the image, you're just linking it.

    if this were being done by a site that everyone loves to hate, I think people would tend to side with AFP.

    No I think if this were anyone else we'd be instead of concentrating on "OMFG IT'S GOOGLE" concentrating on the real issue, which is that AFP is expecting the traditional concepts of fair use that every website that's ever excerpted something and then linked it-- you know, which google news didn't invent-- to be reordered for them.

  31. No. You haven't read the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    "so everybody stops buying from de facto newswire because it's not on google news, which doesn't really matter at all in the 'rest of the world'?"

    No. Re-read the story.

    AFP sells photos to different news organizations. The NYT, London Times, Washington Post, Hong Kong, Tokoy, pretty much everywhere.

    Those newspapers *WANT* Google to index their pages. What AFP is doing is preventing 3rd parties from being indexed by Google.

    So the end result will be that news sites sill be less likely to use AFP photos, because once they do, they will not be indexed by Google.

    Hope that's clearer why not being on google will damage AFP in a way they don't comprehend. Its almost as if they don't understand the Internet. But that's not surprising since they still advertise that you should call them on an ISDN line. Welcome to 1990.

    They really don't get it.

  32. American Fascist Party? by roman_mir · · Score: 2, Informative

    That AFP?

  33. er? by JVert · · Score: 2, Informative

    Google news is still beta, it generates no revenue for google, there are no banners on google news. Of course google benefits greatly from this feature but there was an article on a certan blog about google not quite sure what they will do with google news because if they take it out of beta and begin making money from it then they will be liable for stealing other peoples news articles. But it implied under US law that if they were not making any money off it then they were no different then a blogger. Which now doesn't make sense to me because private party is certanly different then a corporation.
    Anyone else renember this article? about 6 months ago or more.

  34. in related news by pyrrho · · Score: 3, Funny

    google is removing France from Google Maps...

    --

    -pyrrho

  35. Just to play devil's advocate by popo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Before I get totally flamed, let me start by saying Google News is my homepage, and its the first thing I look at every morning. I'm a huge fan.

    That having been said...

    IANAL but I honestly don't understand how Google News can possibly be legal.

    Forgeting for a moment whether or not ad revenue is eventually generated by all those linked-to sites: The question of whether or not legal-permission is required to link to a sub-level of another site is a legal issue from way back when.

    Back in 1997 (if memory serves) I remember it was ruled that paid content sites needed to seek permission before linking to the sublevel of another paid content site. Search engines were where the law got blurry. Google News! however doesn't seem like much of a search engine -- but I suppose one could make the argument that there is indeed search technology at work behind the scenes. From a user perspective however, Google News seems more like a content aggregator.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
  36. Re:AFP will now disappear by totatis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > France is an insignificant piss ant country, not so much a nation as a rabble united by a variety of cheeses.

    Wow, you look like an intelligent person capable of insightful discussion, now, grats.

    > AFP is nothing compared to the Beeb.

    Indeed. Let me explain it for you slowly : the BBC and AFP are not in the same business. BBC gives news to citizens, while AFP gives news to BBC (and about all newspapers in the world).

    > How many shortwave programs does AFP broadcast?

    Let me explain it for you slowly : AFP doesn't broadcast anything, they sell news to newspapers.

    > The Beeb could get along quite well without Google News

    And AFP doesn't give a fuck about google news, since, they're not a newspapers. Every major newspapers in the world is a customer of AFP. NYT, BBC, Washington Post, The Economist, all of them buy content and pictures from AFP. AFP is as widely known and as widely respected as Reuters. Both of them are the first and most respected content provider of every newspapers in the world. Without Reuters and AFP, you would more or less see no pictures on any newspapers. If you don't believe me, buy the NYT, and look for credits on their pictures. 90% of them are from AFP and Reuters.

    You and I are not custumers of AFP, NYT, BBC and all are.

    Basically, Google News is trying to take AFP work without paying for it. AFP is not happy with that, and they have every right to be, since Google is effectivly warezing from them.

    This lawsuit has nothing to do with the French lawsuit on Yahoo, which was quite stupid. This lawsuit is very valid, and Google removing their content shows that they know they would loose in a lawsuit.

    Next time you launch in a flamefest, try to educate yourself, you really do look like a moron talking out of his ass.

  37. Re:AFP will now disappear by Thomas+Miconi · · Score: 4, Informative

    AFP is big in France.

    AFP is big all over the world. There are 3 real global news agencies, AP, AFP and Reuters (in no particular order).

    Hell, they're even "big" in the US ! Look at Yahoo's top stories, check out the sources (upper right corner). Guess who comes third, right behind AP and Reuters ?

    In other parts of the world (say, the Arab world or western Africa), AFP happens to dominate. It has more to do with politics and language than anything else, but still, they're not just big in France.

    How many shortwave programs does AFP broadcast? And in what languages? Let's see, the answer would be none and none. Hell, the Beeb broadcasts in multiple languages.

    Wow. Congratulations, you just discovered that a news agency is not the same as a media corporation (Hint: how many AP / Reuters programs are syndicated on public radio in the United States ? How many shortwave programs do AP and Reuters broadcast ?)

    If you want French media, you should look at TV5 (French-language international television) or Radio-France Internationale (radio services in 19 languages).

    Thomas-

  38. Google didn't respect their robots.txt by setantae · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't see why AFP are being painted as the bad guys here.
    They have a robots.txt that excludes their news articles, and yet Google is/was indexing them. Bad Google.

  39. Re:A Great Day in World History by stungod4 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The above comment speaks for itself. There is something very wrong with the American psyche. The poster is completely unable to see that every statement made about the 'Dastardly French' is actually much more relevant to their own country and its media-fed mass psychosis. http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/3b.htm

  40. Says who? by crashcodesdotcom · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When google requested the various columns and images from the news site, did google agree to any type of non-redistribution of materials?

    I'd imagine that google's bot simply asked the news site's webserver for the information via http requests; and the webserver handed out the goods with no conditions.

    Enjoy

  41. oh no! by Rodney+L+Caston · · Score: 2, Funny

    How ever will I survive without franco-centric views on world news?

    The horror...

  42. So it went something like this? by slapout · · Score: 4, Funny



    AFP: Being on the front page of one the most popular websites in the world is bad for us. We estimate that it has caused us $17.5 million!

    Person 1: How has it done that!?

    AFP: All those hits on our website caused us to go over our bandwidth limit!

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  43. I hope they pull all their pages out of search.... by otis+wildflower · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... make a clean break, and pull all AFP (and preferably AFP-sourced articles) out of the general search as well as the news site.

    Black hole those bitches.

  44. Apostrophe by thechrisproject · · Score: 2, Informative

    Dammit! Learn to use apostrophes, people! "Photos" is just a plural and needs no apostrophe. Here's a funny cartoon about it to make you feel dumb:

    http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif

    I could ignore it if it wasn't on the main page of Slashdot.

  45. Re:AFP will now disappear by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Me? I remeber alot of it. It's important to look at a subject from multiple angles.

    I'm a Historian, I don't read one book or source on something and decide, well that's it.

    The BBC or CNN or Foxnews or FT aren't enough.

    The goal of a copyright when copyrights were established was the have a short window for the author, then to open it wide for people to copy. Copy Right.

    Look at Piri Reis's atlas of 1517, it says that those who copy it and offer it freely are doing the work of God and will be blessed by the Creator of the Universe.

    So, hell, Google is doing God's Work.