Slashdot Mirror
Belgian Newspapers Delisted On Google
D H NG writes "After being ordered by the Belgian courts to 'remove from its Google.be and Google.com sites, and in particular, cached links visible on Google Web and the Google News service, all articles, photographs and graphics of daily newspapers published in French and German by Belgian publishers,' Google had removed all traces of the newspapers in question from all its search services. The newspapers, however, are crying foul, and alleged that it was done in retaliation for being sued for copyright violations."
Sounds to me like that court order pretty much required Google to do what they did. I assume the newspapers simply didn't realise exactly what it was they were really asking for when they made that attack, and I'm sure their competitors are loving them for it right now.
You're welcome to opt-out with your robots.txt
but i'd imagine for example if they license a story from reuters or whatever, they're only licensing it for their own use and not for re-licensing - which would be needed to auto syndicate it to google news site.
Google never has "auto-syndicated" anything from the news websites it aggregates on google news. At most it thumbnails images, pulls headlines and lead sentences. Every full-content article you find hosted on news.google.com itself was licensed from the newswires by google themselves.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Okay, this is partly a case of a poorly written summary. From reading the second article, here's the short version.
A number of newspapers in Belgium won a suit against Google for putting their papers in Google News. The judge in the case ordered Google to remove the sites. Rather than just removing the sites from their news aggregator, they also delisted them from their search engine.
Depending on how much slack you want to give Google, this is either a case of the judge's order being over broad or Google deliberately implementing it in an over broad fashion in order to make a point. I tend toward the latter interpretation; they are not so subtly reminding the papers that they need Google more than Google needs their content.
Now the newspapers are crying foul. They do want to get listed in search results when someone goes looking for them, but don't want to be "plagiarized" (their interpretation, not mine) by Google News.
Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
In addition googlebot follows noindex and nocache in robots.txt so if they don't want their content to be included that's their choice without involving lawyers. Heck, if they want it indexed but no summaries to show up (and thus exclude the results from the news feed I assume) they could use the nonstandard nosnippet tag that googlebot will follow.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
If you read the link pointing to the actual judge's order. You see:
- Order the defendant to withdraw the articles, photographs and graphic representations of Belgian publishers of the French - and German-speaking daily press, represented by the plaintiff, from all their sites (Google News and "cache" Google or any other name) within 10 days of the notification of the intervening order, under penalty of a daily fine of
1,000,000.- ? per day of delay;
What don't you understand with "from all their sites". Then in the clarification between brackets it says again: "or any other name".
More: the Google News bot has a different User-Agent, so you can block it without blocking the search engine crawler.
http://www.google.com/support/news_pub/bin/answer.py?answer=93977
Dilbert RSS feed
...from all their sites (Google News and "cache" Google or any other name) ...
Heh. Be careful what you ask for. You might get it. Also sounds like the Judge is wearing his ass for a hat but that's so common it isn't newsworthy.
I'm not sure how this works in Belgium, but in the US, the moving party typically writes the order themselves, and the judge just signs off. So, it's entirely likely that the Belgian Newspapers screwed themselves by trying to ensure that there weren't loopholes to their order.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS