News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Response to Google open letter by pwc on Monday August 17, 2020 @05:53AM (#24185654)
To be eligible for the scheme, the proposed bill requires annual revenues of at least[0] $150,000 (amongst other things), so I imagine it would exclude most independent-journalist-running-a-blog situations

[0] see section 52G of the draft bill - https://www.accc.gov.au/focus-areas/digital-platforms/news-m...

Re:Response to Google open letter by Jaxkr on Monday August 17, 2020 @06:01AM (#24185687)
Thanks for sharing. An explicit revenue minimum... incredible how blatant this legislation is. Not about supporting journalism at all.
Re:Response to Google open letter by hkt on Monday August 17, 2020 @06:43AM (#24185923)
Wow, that's vile. So clearly about incumbent media power rather than promoting diversity.

I wonder if eg wordpress, or ghost, would be able to create a situation for their hosted blogs in which authors were paid for their content by virtue of the organisation itself having the minimum level of revenue.

Re:Response to Google open letter by microcolonel on Monday August 17, 2020 @08:24AM (#24186525)
> I wonder if eg wordpress, or ghost, would be able to create a situation for their hosted blogs in which authors were paid for their content by virtue of the organisation itself having the minimum level of revenue.

That would open up a whole other can of worms in terms of liability.

Re:Response to Google open letter by chrismorgan on Monday August 17, 2020 @06:25AM (#24185823)
A common solution for such situations is to have some kind of association of or platform for independents which can hold the relevant registration.