edit: adjusted title slightly

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    019 hours ago

    And, with respect, this view is more naive (IMHO) because it’s focused by size of company, and you can’t do that. You can’t have one set of laws for small companies and another set of laws for large companies.

    So if Google has to pay to link to IA, then so does DuckDuckGo and any other small upstart search engine that might want to make a ‘wayback machine this site!’ button.

    Google unquestionably gets value from the sites they link to. But if that value must be paid, then every other search engine has to pay it also, including little ones like DDG. That basically kills search engines as a concept, because they simply can’t work on that model.

    Thus I think your view is more naive, because you’re just trying to stick it to Google rather than considering the full range of effects your policy would have.

    • Avid Amoeba
      link
      fedilink
      English
      217 hours ago

      You can’t have one set of laws for small companies and another set of laws for large companies.

      This is false. We can, and we do. Antitrust laws are one example off the top of my head. There are probably others. The assumption that every actor has to pay the same price is false as well. There are countless examples for this.