Quote:
Originally Posted by GordonBlue
Without knowing much about the situation, I approve of the bill.
Why should Meta and Google make billions of someone else's news content?
Why shouldn't they pay something?
From what I previously read, it's working well in Australia after they passed the same type of law 2 years ago.
|
The Australian law is quoted often as a comparable example, but it really isn't.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/met...-c18-1.6890248
Quote:
Bill C-18 is modelled on a similar law in Australia, the country that first forced digital companies to pay for the use of news content.
Meta, known as Facebook at the time, temporarily blocked Australians from sharing news stories on its platform. The Australian government and the tech company ended up striking a deal and the news ban was lifted.
Rodriguez has pointed to the deal reached in Australia as proof that one can be made in Canada.
But Curran said the Australian law was different because it allowed the company to negotiate private deals with publishers outside of the framework of the regulations. C-18 does not, she said.
"I wish there was a way to reach deals or come to some kind of compromised solution outside the framework of Bill C-18," she said. "But there's really not."
|