This is a solved problem

If these cu^H^Hbelgians dont want google indexing their site, why do they not simply use a "robots" meta tag in their HTML headers, or create a "robots.txt" file? Both of these are honoured by all the major search engines (specifically including google); either would prevent the "infringement" that they evidently so detest without them having to play their proverbial joker.

And if I can just add un petit rantette: ISTM that there is something very wrong with publishing stuff on the internet then suing people when they look at it.

Yes, I know theyre belgians. But even so.

Figures

I live in the most mediocre country in the world... What the Belgian newspapers want is for you to visit their own malware riddled, add-overloaded news-sites directly.
I hope Google removed every trace in their search-engine of these same sites as well?
And 77 million dollars?? What?

Pathetic.

Remove any reference too

Google ought to take it even further and remove any passing reference to such websites from its databases, such that no search query ever directs a user their way. No such thing as bad publicity huh?

except

anonymous coward - why should newspapers go out of their way so that big companies like google don't rip off their stories?

Good Luck with That!

I recently 'asked' Google: "Will you give me $77000000.00?" and they have obliged with a letter from FreeLotto.com stating that I have won that sum, and now I must send them my credit cards F.A.S.T. to go dutch. I can't tell you how excited I am! I'm planning quite a tour of the Burgundian Babble Belt. I don't speak either the French that the Belgian Walloons of the southern provinces (known as Wallonia) speak, nor the Flemish of the Belgian Flemings to the north.
I expect both of them to understand: "chocolate", "waffle",
"Brussels Sprouts", "chips", "beer" and "ABBA". Beyond that, Google may have to translate. So what started as a cockup of parlance, has had bloomin good results for me!

Douglas Got It Correct

Douglas Adams claimed that Belgium was the most obscene word in the galaxy.

Now we know why :-)

I've heard this before

@Anonymous Coward: Yes, and if women wouldn't wear short skirts and low cut tops men would objectify them and harass them. It's their job to wear clothing that doesn't reveal a thing so that men won't have bad thoughts.

Or, we can follow your solution and have them wear a sign that says "don't objectify me, please."

@Anonymous Coward

The issue isn't whether Google is indexing the Belgian sites; it's that they're taking content from those sites without permission. Why should people have to tell Google to not break copyright law?

some miss the point here

I do not use Google for ANYTHING. With that said even my miniscule knowledge of Google news made me check the site to see if what I was thinking was true.

Results? I am right. Right about what? I clicked on 3 random news headlines throughout the whole page and Google redirected my browser to the news site which posted the article EACH AND EVERY TIME.

Google does not appear to be ripping the content from the site and placing it on a google page-- The only thing on Google is the headline and the first little bit of the article.

So....

#1 Google is NOT stealing the content from the site and instead is only providing their users the means to get to the site which hosts the news that the reader is interested in.

#2 At least here in the USA this would (or should) be considered FAIR USE

#3 Google is providing a service to these sites by directing readers to the appropriate site based upon the user's interest in a headline.

#4 Every single professional web site KNOWS that they are posting content that can be mashed up on other sites. If the site owner does not wish this to be so, as previously posted, there are SIMPLE procedures used in Web Page design that will stop this behaviour.

#5 It is disengenious to say that the Web Site can design a complete Web Page but it is too much for them to place a ONE LINE code at the start of the page to 'protect' their content from being used in a manner they do not wish it to be used in.

#6 Google SHOULD remove news headlines from those sites who do not wish to receive this free advertising. Of course most people will continue to use Google News and will continue to be redirected to those sites with news the consumer is interested in.

#7 I think these Belgium news sites might reconsider when they see their traffic drop, and hence their online revenue.. perhaps they will take a page from the RIAA and decide it must be due to it's patrons pirating the news and start suing news customers to make up the difference

Google

Isn't that a yankee company? That says it all I guess. Those arrogant rednecks all got green $ signs instead of pupils, as we Euro-peeps know all too well.

Yet more obverblown claims

I'd also not miss Belgium if it disappeared totally from the Internet. We should have a 'Boycott Belgium' month -- since they don't want us to see their stuff we should make sure they can't see any of our stuff. Just let them fester in their little foetid pool.

I can't imagine what material from Belgium is so fascinating, so un-missable, that its worth $77million. As ever, those who have the least to offer value their trivia the most.

Here's two penny worth...

Now $77000000.00 for Future News Feeds would be realistic, but not for just spreading old news.