<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>mathewingram.com/work &#187; belgium</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mathewingram.com/work/tag/belgium/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work</link>
	<description>... at the intersection of media, technology, business and the web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Jul 2011 15:34:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Belgium: Ignoring reality since 1830</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/05/28/belgium-ignoring-reality-since-1830/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/05/28/belgium-ignoring-reality-since-1830/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 16:47:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mathew</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[belgium]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawsuit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/?p=2447</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Despite the headline on this post, I have nothing against Belgium as a country. I am a big fan of their waffles, for example, not to mention their chocolate &#8212; and Brueghels is pretty cool as well. Still, they are inescapably intertwined in my mind with one of the stupidest lawsuits I can think of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2008%2F05%2F28%2Fbelgium-ignoring-reality-since-1830%2F"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2008%2F05%2F28%2Fbelgium-ignoring-reality-since-1830%2F&amp;source=mathewi&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p>Despite the headline on this post, I have nothing against Belgium as a country.  I am a big fan of their waffles, for example, not to mention their chocolate &#8212; and Brueghels is pretty cool as well.  Still, they are inescapably intertwined in my mind with one of the stupidest lawsuits I can think of in the &#8220;new media&#8221; sphere (and that includes Viacom&#8217;s lawsuit against YouTube): a Belgian media agency, Copiepresse &#8212; which represents some of the country&#8217;s French papers &#8212; is suing Google <a href="http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/05/28/Belgian-newspapers-ask-Google-for-damages_1.html">for linking to its content</a>, and is asking for $77-million in damages. I am not making this up.</p>
<p>The lawsuit was filed in 2006, and Google lost the case in Belgium &#8212; as well as a subsequent appeal &#8212; and <a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/02/about-copiepresse-decision.html">had to remove links</a> to some Belgian newspaper content from its Google News index. At some point after that, it seemed as though the geniuses at Copiepresse realized how their &#8220;victory&#8221; was anything but, and talks between Google and the agency aimed at a settlement of some kind took place for awhile. Those talks have <a href="http://mashable.com/2008/05/28/belgian-newspapers-sue-google-for-sending-them-traffic-again/">apparently fallen through</a> and the group is now pressing forward with its suit, like someone who is determined to saw through the tree branch that they happen to be sitting on.</p>
<p>I know that some people are probably going to start arguing with me in the comments, so before you do, I encourage you to read up about the case &#8212; including some of my previous posts <a href="http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/02/13/belgium-and-google-stupid-stupid-stupid/">on the topic</a>. As far as I can tell, Google&#8217;s use of excerpts from news stories meets (or should meet) every test of &#8220;fair use&#8221; imaginable &#8212; except perhaps in Belgium &#8212; especially since the company makes no money from advertising on Google News pages. On top of all that, linking <em>enhances</em> the value of newspaper content by exposing it to a broader audience. Belgium&#8217;s French newspapers should be thanking Google, not suing it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/05/28/belgium-ignoring-reality-since-1830/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Belgium and Google &#8212; stupid, stupid, stupid</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/02/13/belgium-and-google-stupid-stupid-stupid/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/02/13/belgium-and-google-stupid-stupid-stupid/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:20:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mathew</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[belgium]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[newspapers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/02/13/belgium-and-google-stupid-stupid-stupid/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I confess that I still don&#8217;t get the whole Belgium vs. Google thing. I keep reading about it and reading about it, and thinking about it &#8212; hoping that I have somehow missed a crucial point or argument in the newspapers&#8217; position that makes this whole thing sensible in any way. But by now I [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2007%2F02%2F13%2Fbelgium-and-google-stupid-stupid-stupid%2F"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2007%2F02%2F13%2Fbelgium-and-google-stupid-stupid-stupid%2F&amp;source=mathewi&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p>I confess that I still don&#8217;t get the whole Belgium vs. Google thing. I keep reading about it and reading about it, and thinking about it &#8212; hoping that I have somehow missed a crucial point or argument in <a href="http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&#038;storyID=2007-02-13T113545Z_01_L13127266_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-GOOGLE-BELGIUM-COURT.XML&#038;pageNumber=0&#038;imageid=%E2%88%A9=&#038;sz=13&#038;WTModLoc=NewsArt-C1-ArticlePage2">the newspapers&#8217; position</a> that makes this whole thing sensible in any way. But by now I am totally convinced: It doesn&#8217;t make any sense whatsoever. It is just dumb, with a capital D.</p>
<p><img class="left" id="image988" src="http://www.mathewingram.com/work/wp-content/uploads/morans.jpg" alt="morans.jpg" />As Danny Sullivan notes in <a href="http://searchengineland.com/070213-070353.php">his overview</a> of the case, this complaint from the Belgian group known as Copiepresse dates back almost a year. After the first complaint &#8212; as is customary in these types of cases, when sites don&#8217;t want to be included in Google&#8217;s index &#8212; the search engine advised the agency (as Google <a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/02/about-copiepresse-decision.html">notes here</a>) to use the well-known &#8220;robots.txt&#8221; file to exclude parts of its websites from Google&#8217;s spider-bots. Copiepress apparently said that this process, which takes about 10 minutes, was unacceptable.</p>
<p>So after a year of legal wrangling, and millions of dollars in legal costs, the Belgian group has &#8220;won&#8221; and has forced Google to remove its newspaper content. In other words, it has prevented the world&#8217;s largest and most respected search engine from showing links to that content to people who want that content &#8212; and doing so <em>for free</em>. And the claim that Google makes money from this content, which <a href="http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/01/newspapers-need-to-get-a-clue-quickly/">others have argued</a> in the past, is just as stupid, since Google News doesn&#8217;t carry advertisements on its content pages.</p>
<p>Carlo at Techdirt <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20070213/084650.shtml">shares my feelings</a> on this matter, and I know many other journalists who do as well. Some companies would kill for the kind of profile and access that being linked in Google News provides to potential readers. Someone at Copiepresse clearly sees this as some kind of noble battle against a U.S. tech giant, but all they are really doing is harming themselves. Oh yes, and looking stupid. Did I mention that part?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/02/13/belgium-and-google-stupid-stupid-stupid/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Belgium needs to grab a clue</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/09/18/belgium-needs-to-grab-a-clue/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/09/18/belgium-needs-to-grab-a-clue/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 17:38:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mathew</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[belgium]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/09/18/belgium-needs-to-grab-a-clue/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just when I thought the whole &#8220;Google News is stealing our content&#8221; furore had finally gone away, here comes Belgium. Having fought tooth and nail to not have their material indexed or displayed by Google&#8217;s news aggregator, the tiny country &#8212; whose major contribution to global culture appears to be Belgian waffles &#8212; has finally [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2006%2F09%2F18%2Fbelgium-needs-to-grab-a-clue%2F"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2006%2F09%2F18%2Fbelgium-needs-to-grab-a-clue%2F&amp;source=mathewi&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p>Just when I thought the whole &#8220;Google News is stealing our content&#8221; furore had finally gone away, <a href="http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&#038;storyID=2006-09-18T090026Z_01_L18202356_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-MEDIA-GOOGLE-BELGIUM.XML&#038;archived=False">here comes Belgium</a>. Having fought tooth and nail to <i>not</i> have their material indexed or displayed by Google&#8217;s news aggregator, the tiny country &#8212; whose major contribution to global culture appears to be Belgian waffles &#8212; has finally been successful in its efforts, and will no longer be forced to have Google redirecting traffic to its news sites for free. Another victory for idiocy.</p>
<p>&#8220;We are asking for Google to pay and seek our authorisation to use our content &#8230; Google sells advertising and makes money on our content,&#8221; said Copiepress president Margaret Boribon, conspicuously ignoring the fact that Google doesn&#8217;t sells advertising on the Google News site, and only uses snippets of articles as allowed under most &#8220;fair use&#8221; provisions of copyright law. </p>
<p>Well done, Belgium. Now you can join that small group of morons currently dominated by Agence France-Presse, which successfully had itself (and all of its member papers) <a href="http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1778139,00.asp">removed</a> from one of the world&#8217;s most popular news search engines.</p>
<p><b>Update:</b></p>
<p>Google appears to have taken the judge&#8217;s order literally, and <a href="http://pascal.vanhecke.info/2006/09/18/newspapers-demanding-google-cache-removal-being-zapped-from-index-alltogether/">removed Belgian newspapers</a> not just from the Google News index, but from <i>the entire Google index period</i>. That&#8217;ll show &#8216;em.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/09/18/belgium-needs-to-grab-a-clue/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

