Media companies, including news websites and local newspapers, generally need licenses to operate.
I'm a retard, but I seriously doubt that Reuters doesn't require some sort of licensing to operate legally.
*I will concede that I have no idea how things actually work, however, I can't imagine there is no legal recourse to them manufacturing fake news for the government.
Thank you for pulling my head out. Can't find anything to support the idea that they need any licensing other that copywrite licensing from other outlets for reprinted articles
Yeah, they do need licensing to re-print stories thar aren't their own, but that permission comes from the creator of the content they want to reprint.
I can't find any type of licensing that could be revoked by government for them being weasles. I'm probably very confused about how things actually work
License? They're not a TV channel.
Media companies, including news websites and local newspapers, generally need licenses to operate.
I'm a retard, but I seriously doubt that Reuters doesn't require some sort of licensing to operate legally.
*I will concede that I have no idea how things actually work, however, I can't imagine there is no legal recourse to them manufacturing fake news for the government.
Thank you for pulling my head out. Can't find anything to support the idea that they need any licensing other that copywrite licensing from other outlets for reprinted articles
Are you brittish?
Do they publish anything themselves? I was under the impression Reuters mostly acted as a source for every other media company.
Yeah, they do need licensing to re-print stories thar aren't their own, but that permission comes from the creator of the content they want to reprint.
I can't find any type of licensing that could be revoked by government for them being weasles. I'm probably very confused about how things actually work
This is correct. I think he might be confusing media licensing for TV or radio.