Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th Mar 2013 11:54 UTC
Legal "The European Commission has imposed a EUR 561 million fine on Microsoft for failing to comply with its commitments to offer users a browser choice screen enabling them to easily choose their preferred web browser. In 2009, the Commission had made these commitments legally binding on Microsoft until 2014. In today's decision, the Commission finds that Microsoft failed to roll out the browser choice screen with its Windows 7 Service Pack 1 from May 2011 until July 2012. 15 million Windows users in the EU therefore did not see the choice screen during this period. Microsoft has acknowledged that the choice screen was not displayed during that time." Burn.
Thread beginning with comment 554380
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Typical EU
by BallmerKnowsBest on Wed 6th Mar 2013 18:55 UTC in reply to "Typical EU"
BallmerKnowsBest
Member since:
2008-06-02

Now quick, what other American company can we 'protect' our people from?


While it's not at the EC level, it looks like France and Germany are hard at work trying to find ways to extort money from Google, in exchange for granting them the "privilege" of indexing & promoting news media from those countries:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/germany-wants-google-to-...

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/google-threatens-to-cut-...

Fortunately, Google doesn't seem to have any patience for that BS and has said that if the relevant laws go through, then they will simply stop indexing those sites... Which of course resulted in an orgy of faux-shock & self-entitled whining from French politicians, who were apparently stupid & arrogant enough to believe that Google would bend over and take it.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Typical EU
by Alfman on Wed 6th Mar 2013 19:24 in reply to "RE: Typical EU"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

BallmerKnowsBest,

I'm not terribly familiar with those laws, but from the sources I see (including yours) everyone is allowed to display excerpts, such as those displayed by search engines today. It's just longer pieces that would need to be licensed for republication.

I can understand why google opposes it, but it still isn't their content to do with as they please. If the copyright owner wants to license it to google, then google should pay or forfeit publishing rights. I am aware that google cannot pay them for their content without setting into motion events that would undermine google's principal business model of using everyone else's data for free. Still unless I'm missing something it's hard for me to side with the pro-google agenda. Publishing rights beyond excerpts should lie with the content creator.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Typical EU
by BallmerKnowsBest on Fri 8th Mar 2013 21:29 in reply to "RE[2]: Typical EU"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

BallmerKnowsBest,

I'm not terribly familiar with those laws, but from the sources I see (including yours) everyone is allowed to display excerpts, such as those displayed by search engines today. It's just longer pieces that would need to be licensed for republication.


Really, now? From the very first paragraph of the first article I linked to:

"The lower house of the German parliament, known as the Bundestag, has approved a new bill that would require search engines to pay a license fee for re-publishing content longer than 'individual words or short excerpts.'

Of course, the actual amount of text isn't defined, so for all we know it could be anything beyond the headline. That would be consistent with the earlier extortion attempts by French media:

"Google already has a licensing deal with Agence France-Presse, the French newswire. That deal was struck in 2007, after AFP filed a lawsuit saying Google's use of snippets violated copyright."

I can understand why google opposes it, but it still isn't their content to do with as they please. If the copyright owner wants to license it to google, then google should pay or forfeit publishing rights. I am aware that google cannot pay them for their content without setting into motion events that would undermine google's principal business model of using everyone else's data for free. Still unless I'm missing something it's hard for me to side with the pro-google agenda. Publishing rights beyond excerpts should lie with the content creator.


In that case, they (and you) should be thrilled that Google has stated that they will simply stop indexing news from countries that pass protectionist IP laws. But no, they seem to be even more about about that possibility.... it's almost French & German news media want to have their cake (referral traffic from Google news) AND eat it too (laws that allow them to leech money from foreign companies). But that can't possibly be it, we all that things like that only happen the US.

Frankly, I hope those idiotic laws pass and Google stops indexing those sites. And I'm sure there are French news sources in other countries that would be more than happy to get that referral traffic & fill the gaps.

Reply Parent Score: 2