Should newspapers sue Google and Yahoo as a class action?

Agree with Henry. You lost me with that last sentence. You made a valid point before that when you said the newspaper situation is not the same as YouTube. Yahoo and Google direct the reader to the newspaper's website. How is that bad?

Now if someone else violates the newspaper's copyright and pastes a newspaper story on their website that is not Yahoo and Google's responsibility, even if they directed the reader there. The newspaper's issue is with the thief, not the browser.

 

the AP is a consortium of newspapers. if the papers told AP to stop sending content to web sites AP would have to stop.

 

Why would they? Go to Google right now and type in Paris Hilton. What do you get? Several websites where you can find Paris Hilton stories, including several newspapers. How is that hurting newspapers?

 

I agree with most of this. But, there is a big hole. Google News offers a synopsis, a Cliff's Notes version -- if you will, of the story with the links. Some recent forums I've participated in, and I'm not saying they're spot on, say the general news connoisseur doesn't get past that synopsis.

Which is a huge problem for us. They have our content. Can use it because they link to it, but many, many never click the link. So, it's great for Google. They're first-viewed, and they have no mind if it goes any further than that.

 

That's a misnomer. Associated Press is a consortium, but they are also autonomous.
It was developed that way and is a wonderful checks and balances.

 

Exactly. That's why I said it would take a class action, a consortium of all major newspapers, wire services and the like - sort of like a big unionizing effort.
If it's just a few papers, obviously it wouldn't work.
If enough band together, I think it would. Google would be faced with the loss of major quality news content.
It is a symbiotic relationship, you're right. But it is a really financially lopsided symbiotic relationship right now.
One side is making a ton of money. The other side is bleeding money.
Such a suit, in theory, would try to balance the finances of that symbiotic relationship.

 

Isn't that better than the alternative? The synopsis allows the reader to decide if the story is the one they're looking for. If Google doesn't put your synopsis up there you're going to get a lot less traffic - local people who didn't buy a paper or people from out of town who have to search your website for something because they couldn't find it on Google.

 

Making a lot of money isn't against the law. On what grounds would you sue? Copyright infringement? It's hard to make a case for that if they're only taking a smidgen of your story, giving you credit for it and telling the reader exactly how they can get to your website.

 

It's not hurting newspapers in that way. That is good for newspapers. The problem is Google is making enormous money off of that newspaper content and not giving newspapers their cut of it.
That's where it damages newspapers -- taking but not giving back.

It's like some outsider raiding a newspaper building, taking all the papers, putting them in his own trucks and selling them but not paying the newspaper for it.

 

This is another thread where it would be helpful to have somebody with a law degree or MBA to cut through the clutter for us, like DocTalk can do when the question is medical.

 

You think if someone had the answers, we would be in this mess?

Edit- Fixes double negative and mixed modifiers. Generally a shitty post.

 

Sometimes it takes things getting really bad before a lawsuit is filed or laws are changed to rectify the situation. Happens all the time.