To put it bluntly, copyrights and intellectual property rights protection for good reasons. Artists, musicians or free journalists example, must be able to live from their work. The same goes for newspaper publishers. Anyone who violates these rights on their own intellectual creation, so must find a legal sanction. No one will want to question it.
The planned power protection law of the Federal Government, however, has included in the present coalition draft nothing to do with the protection of intellectual property: it is a law that pretty solid allows publishers continue to demand money for referrals to their own websites not only Google, but by many other translators also link. In the corresponding paper in the coalition committee of the CDU / CSU and FDP from 04 March 2012, means:
"The coalition agreement is agreed that publishers in the online environment should not be treated less favorably than other business brokers. Therefore, manufacturers of newspapers to get their own intellectual property right for the editorial and technical definition of journalistic contributions or small parts of it.
Professionals in the network such as search engines and news aggregators are the future for the distribution of press products (such as newspaper articles) pay a fee to Internet publishers. Thus the press publishers will participate in the profits of commercial Internet services, these - achieve use of publishing - with the previously unpaid. Also, the author should receive appropriate financial contribution towards the realization of the power protection law. Collection and distribution of royalties to be made through a collecting society. The term of protection shall be one year.
The private use of newspapers and the internet will not be subject to remuneration, normal users will not be so affected. In industry, the on-screen reading, storing and printing of newspapers remain free. "
A designed capacity of such property rights would be decided in the free flow of information on the Internet intervention.
This price is clearly too high: while the private use of newspapers would remain free. Nevertheless, ALL users will be affected by such reorganization indirectly of course. Imagine that once before: Who will still refer to future articles on newspaper websites or even want to quote from it, even when sentences or paragraphs ("small parts") may only be used for cash? Such a far-reaching law would be a massive intervention in the public information events would take many small multipliers and so restrict the diversity of opinion drastically.
Needless it is to boot: Who does not want to show up in Google News, just use the Disallow form. Whoever wants to prevent Google makes money with link references to your own pages, you can do this even today with a simple no-follow entry in the meta- prevent tags. And who wants mitkassieren at Google, have to negotiate a contract with Google. Without legislature. Without interfering with the free flow of information. And it's completely legal power protection law.