Google Refuses to Pay for French News Snippets Despite EU Requirement
Google will instead only show the headlines of news articles on search result pages in France, the first EU country to implement the directive.
September 26, 2019 at 04:41 PM
4 minute read
Google has announced that it will not pay French publishers to display extracts from their news articles. The technology company and other republishers of online news in France will shortly be required to do so under French law implementing a new EU copyright directive.
Google will instead only show the headlines of news articles, removing other information such as article extracts and thumbnail pictures unless the publisher allows these to be displayed for free. This could reduce publishers' traffic and hence their online advertising revenue.
The EU copyright directive, which was approved by the European Parliament in April, requires companies operating media platforms such as Google, Facebook and YouTube to obtain licences to host content from publishers.
In passing the legislation, the EU wants to ensure content producers are paid fairly for their work and there is legal transparency and consistency around rights in that work.
The directive states: "In order to achieve a well-functioning and fair marketplace for copyright, there should be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works or other subject matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user-uploaded content, on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts, on authors' and performers' remuneration, as well as a mechanism for the revocation of rights that authors and performers have transferred on an exclusive basis."
Member states have until June 2021 to implement the directive. France is the first nation to do so, as the directive will come into effect later this month.
The French media was not happy with Google's decision and considered it a circumvention of the European legislation, said Arnaud Touati, founder of the law firm Alto Lawyers in Paris who specialises new technologies and startups.
And it is not clear whether Google can legally circumvent the law with this action and still be in compliance with the new copyright directive.
"There is the text and the spirit of the text, and it is likely that this decision would be subject to a dispute at the European [Union] level," he said.
But Richard Gingras, vice-president for Google News, said the company needs to maintain trust with users and therefore cannot pay for content.
"To uphold that trust, search results must be determined by relevance – not by commercial partnerships… That's why we don't pay publishers when people click on their links in a search result," he said.
"Google helps publishers and journalists by helping people find news content and sending them to news sites. In the world of print, publishers pay newsstands to display their newspapers and magazines so readers can discover them. Google provides this benefit to publishers at no cost."
Arnaud Touati, a lawyer at technology firm Hashtag Avocats, said the decision had been viewed in the French media as a circumvention of European legislation. He added: "This decision raises the question of the real applicability of legislations in general, whether internal or European, to actors [that] have a supranational influence."
Google's decision in France follows soon after another blow for online publishers in the EU. A consortium of German newspaper and magazine publishers earlier this month lost a lawsuit they brought against Google, claiming that the technology company was required under German copyright law to pay for the use of article extracts on Google News.
The EU's Court of Justice ruled that the German legal provision in question was not valid because the European Commission had not been officially notified of it.
In 2014, Google removed Spanish publishers from Google News and closed Google News operations in Spain, after a law was passed that required it and other content platforms that display links to and extracts of news articles to pay fees to the relevant publishers to do so.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLinklaters Sees Latest Partner Exit as UK Leveraged Finance Partner Walks To Simpson Thacher
2 minute readEx-Dewey & LeBoeuf Banking Lawyer on Trial in Germany’s Cum-Ex Tax Scandal
DLA Piper & Hogan Lovells Expand German Construction and Property Practices
2 minute readWhite & Case, Cleary Among Firms Gearing Up for Biggest London IPO Since 2022
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Dog Gone It, Target: Provider of Retailer's Mascot Dog Sues Over Contract Cancellation
- 2Lululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
- 3Plaintiff Gets $500K Policy Limit Without Surgery
- 4Philadelphia Bar Association Executive Director Announces Retirement
- 5SEC Chair Gary Gensler to Resign on Trump's Inauguration Day
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250