German Newspapers Want Google To Pay Them For Appearing In Search Results (Even As They Try To Rank Higher)

from the insanity-offense dept

About four years ago, you may recall, a group of German publishers were absolutely furious at Google for daring to send them traffic. At the time, they more or less admitted that they were just jealous that Google was able to earn revenue:
Hans-Joachim Fuhrmann, a spokesman for the German Newspaper Publishers Association, said the Web sites of all German newspapers and magazines together made 100 million euros, or $143 million, in ad revenue, while Google generated 1.2 billion euros from search advertising in Germany.

"Google says it brings us traffic, but the problem is that Google earns billions, and we earn nothing," Mr. Fuhrmann said.
Of course, as we pointed out at the time, he was comparing apples to oranges. Google earns money from search advertising. And the newspapers earn money from advertising as well, so the claim that the newspapers earn "nothing" is wrong. However, two years later, the publishers convinced the German government to take a stand and claim that showing news snippets and linking to the source somehow required a license. That resulted in a legislative fight, ending last year with a somewhat watered down snippet law that no one was entirely sure applied to Google.

Well, it appears the publishers aren't satisfied with how this has all worked out, because as Jeff Jarvis is pointing out, they've kicked off a legal arbitration process, in which they're demanding 11% of gross worldwide revenue on any search result that includes one of their snippets. This has been filed by the VG Media industry group. This is bizarre on multiple levels, including the fact that if everyone was able to get that, given the "10 blue links" nature of Google, the company would have to pay out over 100% of its search revenue to the very same people they're sending traffic to. That's... ridiculous.

Of course, we've seen all of this before. In nearby Belgium, a bunch of newspapers demanded payment back in 2006, and a court then ordered Google to pay up. When Google, instead, decided to remove those newspapers from its index, the very same Belgian newspapers flipped out and demanded to be let back into Google. Eventually, for reasons that I still don't understand, Google effectively decided to pay off the Belgian newspapers with a promise of vaguely helping them to make money online. I would imagine that the German newspapers are just looking for a similar handout. Same thing as French newspapers.

However, the example of the Belgians both demanding payment, but then also freaking out when they were removed from the index, is instructive. These newspapers receive tremendous benefits from being included in Google: Google sends them a ton of traffic. That's why they got so upset when removed. The problem is that (1) they're apparently bad at monetizing that traffic and (2) they're jealous of Google, thus demanding a pay off of some sort. As Danny Sullivan writes about this latest lawsuit, the true hypocrisy is apparent in the fact that the German newspapers, supposedly so upset about Google listing them without paying, have not only done nothing to remove themselves from Google's index (as can be easily done), but have actually made use of Google's tools to enhance their appearance within Google.

As Sullivan notes, these newspapers aren't being "swept up into Google's results against their wills," but rather appear to be "actively trying to gain more placement and visibility in them." And that's why this move for a cut of the revenue is so ridiculous and cynical. Basically, they're getting an incredibly valuable service from Google for free and are now demanding to get paid for it as well.

Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    Mason Wheeler (profile), Jun 20th, 2014 @ 1:05pm

    "Google says it brings us traffic, but the problem is that Google earns billions, and we earn nothing," Mr. Fuhrmann said.

    Dear Mr Fuhrman,

    If 100 million Euros is nothing to you, could you please send me a bit of nothing?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 1:39pm

      Re:

      Be more specific, and ask for 11% of his nothing. Otherwise he may just give you a single Euro and call it a day.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    SolkeshNaranek (profile), Jun 20th, 2014 @ 1:13pm

    I want 11% of your "nothing". (Under German publisher "interpretation" of how things should work, this request seems to be fair.)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 1:21pm

    So I should charge subway for making my subs?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Baron von Robber, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 1:26pm

    "Google says it brings us traffic, but the problem is that Google earns billions, and we earn nothing," Mr. Fuhrmann said.

    Google: We are sorry, Mr. Fuhrmann. We've corrected the situation. We no longer display results that point to your news source. Now, your competitors will display, but not yours.

    Mr Fuhrmann: ?!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    That One Guy (profile), Jun 20th, 2014 @ 1:36pm

    So, how's that paying out to the Belgian and French newspapers looking now Google? Maybe wishing you'd had a bit more spine and given them what they asked for, rather than what they wanted?

    By paying out when the newspapers came with their ridiculous demands, Google basically waded out into shark-infested waters and shot themselves in the foot, it's hardly surprising that, upon scenting blood, it would get more attention from those looking for easy money, and it will continue to get more and more attention from parasites like this until it finally stands up to them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 1:39pm

    Google will no doubt play this the same way it played the Belgium case. Only were I Goggle, it would not include paying these newspapers nor VG Media industry group anything. Instead were I Google I would be demanding that 11% as a reinstatement fee. Since this is the price being sought as fair were they charged it for their access at the same price they thought fair, why should they object? It would place others with this scheme on notice what to expect in demanding more money.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 1:50pm

    Normal businesses pay to get included in phone books but content companies have such an outsized sense of entitlement that they want to be paid to get included in the internet equivalent of a phone book. Imagine going to Burson-Marsteller and demanding they make an ad for you and then pay you for the privilege of advertising you.

    And it's not just the content companies. ISPs want to be paid twice even though the sender and receiver already both pay even though in physical shipping only the sender pays. There's something very strange about the way people treat information.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Nate, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 1:55pm

    A similar law is being considered in Spain:
    http://the-digital-reader.com/2014/05/12/spain-wants-to-kill-of-spanish-news-sites-via-a-googl e-tax/

    Does anyone know if it has passed or been defeated?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 2:13pm

    Buh

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 2:15pm

    Ha, Didnt expect that to be published. Im not anon, Im MunKy, look me up.

    100 million euros split between papers, compared to 1.2 billion to one company? Actually, that IS kinda unfair. And wtf, google are a search engine, not a fucking guardian doorway of the internet, how dare they remove results.

    Not that I agree with newspapers either, but this is bloodsuckers sucking blood from evil bloodsuckers that promise not to do evil.

    Fuck them ALL!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      That One Guy (profile), Jun 20th, 2014 @ 2:34pm

      Re:

      And wtf, google are a search engine, not a fucking guardian doorway of the internet, how dare they remove results.

      When Google is sending them extra traffic, for free, and the newspapers turn around and demand to be paid for all that free traffic they're getting, I'd say removing them from the results is about right.

      If they're going to claim that google is 'stealing' their traffic, then they should be glad to be de-listed,as obviously the traffic to their sites will increase without all that 'stealing' going on.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 21st, 2014 @ 2:12am

        Re: Re:

        Google is not sending them traffic for free. Yes its cheeky, but how many of these newspapers is making much of that 100 million euros? Id love to see the list broken down. Lets remember, that google makes 1200 million euros for that "free" advertising. Again, fuck them all, cheeky bastards imo :)

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          John Fenderson (profile), Jun 21st, 2014 @ 10:30am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "Google is not sending them traffic for free"

          It's not? What are they charging the newspapers for it then?

          "how many of these newspapers is making much of that 100 million euros?"

          I have a very hard time seeing how that's at all relevant.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            PaulT (profile), Jun 24th, 2014 @ 8:38am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            He might mean that they probably pay for adsense or other advertising on google directly. In which case, it's even more ridiculous to complain that they earn money for providing their service. This is the level of logical discourse from ACs around here, sadly.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Lord_Unseen (profile), Jun 20th, 2014 @ 2:53pm

      Re:

      "100 million euros split between papers, compared to 1.2 billion to one company? Actually, that IS kinda unfair."

      Hardly. Google's ad revenue is for all search ads they served in Germany. The newspapers, however, were just newspaper ads. News reporting is a niche (and a crowded niche at that), internet search is general. Google is guaranteed to get more traffic than a random newspaper because they do more. It's a bit like a windshield repair shop complaining because they make less money than Ford. You can't expect something with a niche market to make as much money as something with a general market, end of story.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 21st, 2014 @ 2:15am

        Re: Re:

        Google are a search engine, not an advertising engine. Also, I wonder how much google made overall, worldwide. A little bit more that 1200 million euros, its safe to assume.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          John Fenderson (profile), Jun 21st, 2014 @ 10:31am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Uh, no, Google is an advertising engine. The consumer-facing stuff (search, gmail, etc.) are simply the vehicles by which the advertising gets delivered.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Mr. Oizo, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 2:35pm

    Why not ? It is just a different model of structuring information

    I find the idea quite interesting actually. You give someone your info, they pay you. It is an interesting change to current practices, and one that might be beneficial for society. This was also discussed here, but then in the context of facebook: http://falkvinge.net/2014/01/20/wages-for-facebook-maybe-its-not-so-crazy/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      John Fenderson (profile), Jun 21st, 2014 @ 10:32am

      Re: Why not ? It is just a different model of structuring information

      That's the way it works right now. Facebook, Google, etc., do pay you for your information. They pay you by providing services.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 2:35pm

    The real world equivalent of this would be a restaurant asking to be paid by someone who gave directions on how to get there to a new customer. That's just crazy.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Mr.Oizo, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 2:42pm

      Re:

      No, the real world equivalent would be a restaurant asking the writer of a 5 star brochure to pay for the meal snippets they want to sample.

      Might not be a smart idea, but it is a better comparison than yours.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 7:28pm

        Re: Re:

        How is comparing an easily accessible index to a limited brochure a better comparison? Google isn't the one "writing a brochure" based on sampling snippets, they're directing people to what they search for.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 2:43pm

    And there you see, in its natural habitat, the entitled.

    When seeing a competitor making money, the entitled can often be seen engaging in a fighting ritual, challenging the competitor to give it money. The most common style seen in the wild is the "You're making money, and you've benefited from what I've done, therefore I deserve to choose how much you owe me" dance. In this dance, young entitleds commonly make the mistake of thinking work done by others is theirs to reap from. This is the leading cause of pre-adulthood "You're an idiot, fuck off" syndrome, which can be fatal to an entitled's reputation in the tribe.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Ernesto Gonzalez, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 2:54pm

    I'm not a Google fanboy or even a general supporter, but these German pricks need to go fuck themselves. I hope to hell they don't cave and essentially subsidize every German newspaper. America and American companies need to stop being the welfare supplier of the world...leaches.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 21st, 2014 @ 2:19am

      Re:

      "America and American companies need to stop being the welfare supplier of the world...leaches."

      Google dont care what borders they are in. They are not an "American" company, they are worldwide. They go where the money is. If you think the USA gives welfare to the world, is it also fair to say they are the world bullies and they beat kids up for money?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    mark, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 2:58pm

    At the moment the two big parties in power have over 80% of the seats in the parlament. And one of them actually owns a lot of papers. They already are discussing a new law that would require to guarantee newspapers top positions in Google Search! So simply delisting them wouldn't work. They probably have to bribe like in france. Although "Axel Springer" and "Burda" probably would prefer if Google colluded with them to kill all the competition.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    John85851 (profile), Jun 20th, 2014 @ 5:11pm

    And where's Bing?

    Like the UK law demanding Google remove bad results, where is Bing? Why aren't companies demanding Microsoft give them a cut of the ad income? Or are these companies basically admitting they don't much from Bing so they're not worth suing?

    And like some other people are saying, when does Google decide it's too much of a hassle to do business in Germany? Just shut down all Google services for anyone with a German IP address and see what happens.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    AC, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 5:53pm

    Time for Google to move out of Europe, they are Crazy there and if Google lets this keep happening, soon they will make no money in europe, but will instead give it out to every Tom, Dick and Hitler that asks for it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 7:31pm

    Techdirt owes me 11% of its revenue for allowing me to read this article for free.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    KevinEHayden (profile), Jun 20th, 2014 @ 8:11pm

    One strike and you're out!

    Google needs to grow a pair and put a policy in place whereby newspapers or other companies that initiate shakedowns like this are banned from the search results.
    Once they start to fade away into obscurity, and they come back begging to be let into the results again, Google should make them sign an agreement prohibiting them from ever suing it again.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 20th, 2014 @ 9:08pm

    the answer here is pretty clear. cut them out of the search results completely! see how they like that!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Case, Jun 21st, 2014 @ 7:02am

    Problem is, if Google did the understandable thing and kicked the crybabies out of its index, the next day they'd sue Google for abusing its monopoly...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 21st, 2014 @ 10:01am

    The solution is simple, throw them off the index, I'm sure someone will be happy to absorb all the moronic newspaper traffic with rewritten articles LOL..

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      techflaws (profile), Jun 21st, 2014 @ 9:39pm

      Re:

      It's not as I wrote two posts above yours.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        John Fenderson (profile), Jun 22nd, 2014 @ 8:24am

        Re: Re:

        But that "preparation" makes little sense. It would just result in Google no longer providing any services to Germany at all. Google wouldn't be hurt very badly. Germans might be a bit a bit pissed off.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          That One Guy (profile), Jun 22nd, 2014 @ 12:39pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Makes perfect sense actually, Google has shown in the past that they'll cave if enough pressure is put on them, the newspapers and politicians are probably banking on Google just giving in and paying out(again), rather than pulling out of an entire country.

          This despite the fact that each time they cave in to tactics like this, it just increases the odds of it happening again, whereas if they stood up even once such tactics would never be considered in any other country due to the public backlash against any politician who tried it.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            techflaws (profile), Jun 23rd, 2014 @ 9:58pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Exactly. Their fight against the Leistungsschutzrecht was too little, too late. Now the politicians smell blood because they stupidly think cosing up to the publishers will result in good press. Embarassing.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
Advertisement
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Support Techdirt - Get Great Stuff!

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.