Jajcus

Those would be different kind of regulations. Not just ‘you need functioning brakes’ kind, but also ‘you must serve this route that hardly anyone uses and and you cannot make any extra money from’. Or ‘no extra fees, even where some people would pay them’.

If that means proper regulations (as it should) I bet they would hate it.

And that is the problem with this idea.

Subscription to a software is not mutually exclusive with self-hosting. Developers deserve to earn money, especially those who do not rely on collecting data, showing ads and enshittification of their cloud platform.

‘Pay to show a link’ is the way Google wants us to see this legislation. But linki are not what the news sources are fighting. The problem is Google presents the news and other information in the search result in the way that users often do not need to leave Google and foll9w the link.
Someone produces content so people visit their się and make them money, but those users get the information they want (sometimes incomplete or broken) straight from Google and only Google gets the money. That is not fair and that is what laws like this try to fix (better or worse). But Google and such have powerful propaganda and here we are.

Another thing is: users of services like Reddit or Lemmy also do similar thing (posting content in a way that preventing monetization at its source), so they have extra reason to take Google side.