Content Owners to Charge Royalties for Searching?

dwarfking writes in with a story that follows up on the impact of recent Google events: "Ok, maybe I'm a little dense here, but isn't this plan more of an impact to the content provider than to the search engines. From the article: 'In one example of how ACAP would work, a newspaper publisher could grant search engines permission to index its site, but specify that only select ones display articles for a limited time after paying a royalty.' So, ok, a search engine company decides it doesn't want to pay royalties and therefore doesn't index the provider's site. Now won't the provider actually lose readers since their articles won't be locatable by search anymore?"

greed...

[wulfbyte]

is the worlds most common and least forgivable form of stupidity.

Re:Dumb

[Deadstick]

In fact, it's right up there with Radio Shack's policy back in the TRS-80 days.

They claimed the exclusive right to control mention of their computer in print. If you published a BASIC program to run on it, or an article about how to use it, their lawyer would show up demanding that you pay royalties or desist. Magazines resorted to talking about "S-80 Bus" computers, which was sufficiently generic.

They got their wish, of course: you can read all the computer magazines you want without seeing anything about Radio Shack computers.

rj