This is based on a very quick reading of the explanatory note here (direct PDF link), so I could be wrong.
Facebook's press release seems to focus on the bargaining portion of the new law, which sets out some ground rules for when a platform like facebook wants to use/link to articles from a news publisher. It requires good faith from both parties and sets out an arbitration process when parties are negotiating about payment for the use of articles (see pages 37-50 of the linked PDF). I don't think that is actually a problem for Facebook because if, as FB claims , "the value exchange between Facebook and publishers runs in favor of the publishers", then publishers would agree to let FB continue to use their articles for free.
I think FB is focusing on that to distract from the other portion of the law, which requires platforms like FB to be more transparent about certain things, including the data they collect on users, changes to their algorithms, and referral traffic to other sites (see page 26 of the linked PDF). I think that is the part that FB is really balking at, but it wouldn't look good for them to say "we don't like it because we don't want to show you what data we're collecting and how we're using it", so they're focusing on the bargaining portion as a distraction.
Again, this is based on a very quick reading of the explanatory note so please correct me if I'm wrong.
It's bizarre right? They seem to be laboring under this delusion that they have big international clout but nobody is willing to put up with their shit. Very amusing.
Context:
shut the fuck up your cold black heart pumps only profit. how dare corporate press release insult us like this
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
you have to 10 seconds to choose a side
This is based on a very quick reading of the explanatory note here (direct PDF link), so I could be wrong.
Facebook's press release seems to focus on the bargaining portion of the new law, which sets out some ground rules for when a platform like facebook wants to use/link to articles from a news publisher. It requires good faith from both parties and sets out an arbitration process when parties are negotiating about payment for the use of articles (see pages 37-50 of the linked PDF). I don't think that is actually a problem for Facebook because if, as FB claims , "the value exchange between Facebook and publishers runs in favor of the publishers", then publishers would agree to let FB continue to use their articles for free.
I think FB is focusing on that to distract from the other portion of the law, which requires platforms like FB to be more transparent about certain things, including the data they collect on users, changes to their algorithms, and referral traffic to other sites (see page 26 of the linked PDF). I think that is the part that FB is really balking at, but it wouldn't look good for them to say "we don't like it because we don't want to show you what data we're collecting and how we're using it", so they're focusing on the bargaining portion as a distraction.
Again, this is based on a very quick reading of the explanatory note so please correct me if I'm wrong.
deleted by creator
It's bizarre right? They seem to be laboring under this delusion that they have big international clout but nobody is willing to put up with their shit. Very amusing.