If the hairdresser turns on the radio, they have to pay.
https://www.smallbusiness.wa.gov.au/blog/playing-music-your-...
I'm not sure why Australians are happy with this but not with what the ACCC is doing?
That said, it's fun to watch this go down.
If the hairdresser turns on the radio, they have to pay.
https://www.smallbusiness.wa.gov.au/blog/playing-music-your-...
I'm not sure why Australians are happy with this but not with what the ACCC is doing?
That said, it's fun to watch this go down.
I think most Australians wouldn't be aware about the playing music in small businesses thing too, so I wouldn't use that as a benchmark.
In the case of Facebook, I imagine there are people who read the headline + snippet on Facebook, look at the photo and then don't click the linked article, which seems more like actual infringement of the copyright. It's not the same as taking the entire newspaper and replacing all the ads with your own, but it's a bit like that, enough that I can see what the intention of the law was. It's all complicated by the fact that the news organisations currently facilitate the process, and obviously at some point they thought it was worth it