Slashdot Mirror
Another Publisher Challenges Legality of Links
NewtonsLaw writes: "It seems that the legality of hypertext linkiing has once a gain been called into question according to
this story running on Wired.com.
As the former online publisher of 7am.com, I was once threatened by the Nando Times in a similar manner when I was linking to their stories.
Local TV broadcaster TVNZ also made all sorts of noise about the illegality of linking to their content
back in 1966 but have since come to their senses.
Over the years I've had similar bitchy complaints from a number of online publishers who simply haven't worked out that links from other sites are something to be encouraged because the drive traffic and boost search-engine ratings.
A great resource for those interested in the history, opinions and law on the matter of the legality of linking is the
Link Controversy page created and maintained by Stefan Bechtold.
Most publishers eventually realize that trying to block linking through the courts is a really dumb thing to do -- but there's always someone who simply doesn't get it."
about the illegality of linking to their content back in 1966 but have since
1966? Excellent prior art for the BT patent!!
Under NO circumstances can anybody link to my site. There's nothing I hate more than seeing links to my site all over the place. Fucking links...
'Course, back then we didn't have no fancy new-fangled Pee Cees ta link with. We had ta write our "web pages" on paper, and instead of a link, we wrote down driving directions for how to find the specified document. Porn 'taint no fun when ya gotta drive 250 miles o' back country roads ta find it. I tell ya, the Interweb was different back then... we had ta use REAL superhighways instead o' this Information Superhighway.
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
I laughed when I saw 1966. It's a typo, the article is from 1996. Duh.
Anyway, I'm reminded of something from the currently ongoing bnetd fiasco: The EFF linked to a Penny Arcade comic on the subject. Penny Arcade doesn't agree with the EFF and said, "Instead of linking to the comic, please link to the rant." One guy from the EFF said, "OK" and removed the link, then an hour later the link was back and an email arrived saying "Linking's perfectly legal, we'll do as we like." So PA changed the target of the URL to some messed up thing involving dogs and some old guy. Very amusing.
Moral: if you don't want someone linking to you, don't raise a fuss, just mess with your referrer permissions and all.
[o]_O
Day 1: /News/microsoft.php points to a great article about microsoft.
/News/microsoft.php redirects everyone randomly to a porn site.
Days 2-6: People read it and link to it.
Day 7:
They'll soon stop linking
The nature of the web is that a web page is open unless proven otherwise. It is like a store with no locks on the door. If it is locked then I won't go in. If the door is wide open, I will go in.
My website is not a store. It is more like my house. By accessing it you are trespassing on my private property. It doesn't matter whether or not I locked the doors.
ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
How's this? Find out the most rampant abusers from the logs, and anytime a referral comes in from there, hit 'em with the goatse.cx guy.
Last post!