Slashdot Mirror


Fuddruckers Called Out on Hotlinking

naught writes "Fuddruckers, a hamburger chain, hotlinked to a flash game developer's Burgertime clone on their 'Fuddrockers' page. When the developer noticed an abnormal amount of traffic coming from their website, he decided to let the company know how he felt -- and maybe teach them about hotlinking.." From the post: "So, I redirected everything coming from Fuddruckers.com. (learned all about .htaccess files also... neat!) Wrote a nice little message pointing out how incredibly stupid their web developer is. And then redirected the main page to a pleasant little website showing photographs of slaughterhouses. And also opened up some more popups, for those that don't have popup blockers."

57 of 668 comments (clear)

  1. Obviously he wasn't a Slashdotter... by Alioth · · Score: 3, Funny

    Obviously this guy wasn't a Slashdotter, or he'd have linked to our favorite image... the Goatse Guy!

    1. Re:Obviously he wasn't a Slashdotter... by usv · · Score: 5, Funny

      This reminds me of one day, when I was reading my access_logs and discovered that some bastard was hotlinking to a "Powered by SuSE" png button on my server. He had placed the image in his .sig on some forum and didn't bother to host the pic in his own web-space. I wanted to teach him a lesson, and thus the "Powered by Goatse" image was born. After setting Apache to serve the new picture instead, requests dropped dramatically during the next week :)

  2. What am I missing? by coupland · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wait a minute... So someone is punishing another person for using a hotlink on the web? Someone has spent too much time sniffing the corporate glue of "we own everything!". The web is *about* linking, and open data structures, and access to information. How does information suddenly become inviolate if it's not splashed with corporate logos? If you don't want it to be seen by the world, don't publish it to the world...

    1. Re:What am I missing? by PipOC · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fuddruckers did this without so much as giving credit to the author, let alone using their own bandwidth to host it. They passed it off as their own material.

    2. Re:What am I missing? by mixmasterjake · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because all information should be free. Uh, except MY information, I mean. My work is copyrighted so keep your damn links away! All corporate information should be free, though. That's what I mean. Screw the man!

      --
      TODO: come up with a clever sig
    3. Re:What am I missing? by iCEBaLM · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The credit to the author is in the titlescreen of the game, even his own URL. Why duplicate work?

      If you don't want people accessing resources you make publicly available on the public internet then don't make them publicly available.

    4. Re:What am I missing? by iCEBaLM · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Errr... if I put up a file, for me and my friends, and Yahoo decides to put it up on their front page, (without permission or credit) then I'm out (depending on the size of the file) several thousand dollars. (Due to hosting costs) this is wrong.

      The only thing wrong about it is you failing to use technical means to keep this file private for only you and your friends via password or some such, as well as negotiating a poor hosting contract with your provider which would make you liable for something of this magnatude.

      You gamble that a file you post will not be downloaded much, but it's only a gamble. If you put something out there for public consumption and the public consumes it then it is not the publics fault for doing so for how is the public to know what contract you have with your hosting provider? How is the public to know you will be harmed if the public accesses resources you explicitly provide to the public? It's rediculous.

      The whole idea of "bandwidth theft" is a fallacy on its face.

    5. Re:What am I missing? by noisymime · · Score: 3, Insightful

      this guy didn't fail to use technical means, its just that his technical means was redirecting to another (public, freely accessible etc) website.

    6. Re:What am I missing? by Wieland · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If fuddruckers had just included a LINK ("check out this great game on briggster.com"), that would be OK, because that's indeed what the web is all about.
      But this isn't just direct linking, it's embedding the game into your own site as if it were part of your own site, while making someone else do all the work, and pay the bill.
      Linking is not the same as hotlinking. The former is what makes the web, the latter is stealing.

    7. Re:What am I missing? by Guspaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In the first place, Fuddruckers' page leaves guests with the impression that they did the game themselves. Meanwhile, they make money off of somebody else's work, without credit, acknowledgement, a link to allow visitors to return traffic to the host's site. But wait, there's more...

      There is a quite obvious URL and credits in the flash game itself. They're not giving anybody the impression that they did it themselves.

      Was it appropriate to hotlink the file, making it harder for users to get to his site? No. Is anybody being fooled about where it is coming from? No.

      This isn't nearly so big a deal as you or even the original author is making it to be (He isn't even seeing much traffic/bandwidth from them). At worst it is a lack of curtesy that could have been easily solved by contacting the site hosting it and requesting they link to the HTML page instead of the flash file directly.

      The author chose, instead of the proper thing (contacting these "fuddruckers" people), posting graphic images. The author is now just as guilty as the people doing the hotlinking were, because he mishandled the situation so badly.

  3. Just to get this out of the way.. by XaXXon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No one is saying that Fuddruckers can't link to someone else's site.

    BUT

    When you do that, you're pointing people at someone else's content that they can choose to change at any time.

    Sure, it's your "right" to link to someone else's page (or else the web wouldn't work), but make sure you don't piss them off or you never know what you'll be pointing to in the future.

  4. Steal the bandwidth, or steal the work? by tepples · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Fuddruckers, take notice of this practice... such a hard concept... of downloading the game and HOSTING IT YOURSELF... versus stealing other's bandwidth...

    Under some theories of netiquette, linking to an HTML page that references a Flash file is more polite than copying the Flash file to your own server because the former is normal use of the World Wide Web and the latter is copyright infringement. To put it into RIAA terms, "stealing" bandwidth is preferable to "stealing" a work of authorship.

    1. Re:Steal the bandwidth, or steal the work? by croddy · · Score: 5, Insightful
      that's exactly right. while fuddrucker's failure to ask permission was poor netiquette, there is nothing ethically or legally (afaik) wrong with linking content from another server. that's what the world wide web was designed to do, and it does it very well. plus, there's a good argument to be made that caching a local copy and redistributing it would have constituted copyright infringement.

      of course, the poor webmaster whose server got slammed also did the right thing. the challenge of people "hotlinking" your content and "stealing" your bandwidth is best countered by technological measures -- not by rules, laws, or complaints. by employing the tools contained in a vast, featureful web server, he was able to stop fuddrucker's from using his content in a way he didn't approve, as well as solve a technological problem using the appropriate means -- not by making threats and demands.

      on the internet, controlling the use of your content is simple. configure your software to transmit it only to those whom you'd like to have it.

    2. Re:Steal the bandwidth, or steal the work? by Patchw0rk+F0g · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If I was in the market for any software this guy was writing, he could consider himself blacklisted at this point...

      Screw that. I've had my own content stolen and misused in the past. If I was looking for a web developer, this is the kinda guy I'd want: one that can take a sneaking, thieving idiot like that and turn the tables. Kinda reminds me of baiting Nigerian email scammers... (sniffs back a tear)

      Way to go, man!

      --
      When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. ~~ Hunter S. Thompson
    3. Re:Steal the bandwidth, or steal the work? by DMadCat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A polite email from the company webmonkey in the first place asking if they could use the content would have been preferable.

      IF the "company webmonkey" even acknowledged his email how long do you think it would have taken them to change the site. In my experience corporate entities (I work in IT for a fairly large one) take quite a bit of time to do much of anything that doesn't affect their bottom line.

      Perhaps you might want to take a look at his site. Something tells me he isn't really looking for marketing revenue. If you look closely you'll see he has no advertising on what appears to be a personal website.

      His way, while possibly juvenile, was also a much quicker way of resolving the issue.

      I'm sure he's falling all over himself in a panic that you're unwilling to hire him as a software guy, though.

    4. Re:Steal the bandwidth, or steal the work? by Alcoholist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Also, completely stupid. A couple of polite emails would have likely cleared the whole thing up. Does he suppose this burger company will want anything to do with him now?

      Here is a fellow, in a moment of juveline petulance, destroyed a potential business opportunity (eg. "I'll write you an even better game for $$$"), to say nothing about damaging his reputation. The Internet is just full of people who react without thinking. . . He forgets the great rule of everything -- two stupids don't make a smart.

      He didn't have to do anything more complicated than take content down and write a polite email.

      --
      Bibo Ergo Sum.
    5. Re:Steal the bandwidth, or steal the work? by HangingChad · · Score: 3, Insightful
      A polite email to the company webmonkey would likely have accomplished the same thing.

      Likewise a simple phone call from the Fuddruckers web developer could have resulted in a win for both organizations. I've gotten permission for music, pictures, articles, movies all kinds of stuff just for asking. Most times it's worked out well for both of us and more than once I made contacts that were useful on future projects.

      Personal communication, what a concept, huh?

      --
      That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    6. Re:Steal the bandwidth, or steal the work? by ceejayoz · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=referer

      " A misspelling of 'referrer' which somehow made it into the HTTP standard. A given web page's referer (sic) is the URL of whatever web page contains the link that the user followed to the current page. Most browsers pass this information as part of a request."

    7. Re:Steal the bandwidth, or steal the work? by FLEB · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Taking is not always stealing. If I ask Port 80, and Port 80 says "yes", then there's nothing stealing about it. Without that assumption, the Internet would be mostly useless.

      As it stands, it's a matter of courtesy (of the linker) and technological controls (of the linked).

      --
      Information wants to be free.
      Entertainment wants to be paid.
      You just want to be cheap.
    8. Re:Steal the bandwidth, or steal the work? by brentyl2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I understand completely that Fuddrucker's should have asked the BurgerTime guy for his permission to link to his site, or at least given him a head's up that they intended to do so. It's a matter of common courtesy. BUT, the BurgerTime guy handled the situation like a tool.

      Who wouldn't want the traffic to their blog/site/whatever? Bump your ad revenue! That's the missing ???? step to profit.

      As has been noted, the Fudd's traffic was roughly 5% of his bandwidth, so spare us the "excessive bandwidth charges" sob story.

      If you didn't want the traffic, just block it. Redirect it back to Fudd's. Whatever. Don't react like a 13 year old.

      And finally: For me this is the best part. He ranted about being hotlinked without notice... this is EXACTLY what he did to the slaughterhouse folks, and even noted with apparent amusement that their sites were being "hammered" (his words). Don't bitch about netiquette and then hose the next guy in exactly the same manner.

      Fuddrucker's did nothing fundamentally wrong. They lacked some social graces and failed the common coutesy test, but did nothing malicious, immoral or illegal. The BurgerTime guy trumped all of that.

      --
      Regards, John Hancock.
    9. Re:Steal the bandwidth, or steal the work? by KillShill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      on the internet, you DON'T control the use of your content, simple.

      don't put it up without password authentication if you want some measure of "control".

      fuddruckers and anyone else on the web have a right to link to whatever they want.

      that's what the web is all about.

      and talk about netequette.. the poor webmaster redirected the output to a virtual goatse picture or whatever.

      they both messed up but the webmaster of the site in question is clearly unhappy that the hippie communists have the nerve and daring to link to his precious content.

      if it's available to the public, you have every right to link to it. there is no STEALING involved here whatsoever. NETequette is a different matter.

      --
      Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
  5. Ass by MattW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Note to flash guy: you're an ass and a publicity hound.

    (1) Your game has a URL tag on it, so it's impossible for fuddrucker's to represent it as their own.

    (2) Fuddrucker's accounted for only a small portion of total hits, and yet you're complaining about the bandwidth usage?

    (3) Despite the evidence that the link was not particularly stressful nor malicious in any way, you went way out of your way to do something incredibly malicious back.

    How... bad.

  6. What are YOU missing? by TheStupidOne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A) Corporate entity used someone's work without their permission, solely to gain traffic.
    B) Corporate entity hotlinked said work so that the creator would have to foot the bandwidth bill

    I don't think the creator would have mind much if he had his work used with permission and was hosted on Fuddrucker's servers. Hell, I would have taken it as an honor. This isn't a random teenager hotlinking some crazy photoshop on his Angelfire site, this is a major corporation stealing someone's work and bandwidth. Fuddruckers not only stole his work and claimed it as their own, but they stole his bandwidth at the same time. And they profited from their theft, while he was left with the bandwidth expenses.

    Information should be free, but people's hard work and creativity should be rewarded. If someone is profiting off someone else's work, then the creater deserves compensation, unless he specifically allows it. I even ask permission from the site owner or creator before taking things and using them on my site. It's common curtesy. Just because it's on the Internet doesn't mean it's free to just take and profit from.

    --
    unable to resolve function slashdot.sig(), aborting...
    1. Re:What are YOU missing? by bogie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "but people's hard work and creativity should be rewarded. "

      Ah yes, especially the hard work of someone who is stealing and copying from the creators of burgertime.

      "while he was left with the bandwidth expenses."

      And somehow his hotlinking to the slaughterhouse images from another host who now has to foot the bill is somehow ok?

      Weird sense of morality you have. Fudruckers should not have hotlinked to his site. But face it, by any measure this guy is a total asshole for trying to shock and offend people. There is an appropriate adult action to take in that situation by anyone with even the slightest bit of maturity. He decided to act like a pissed off 14 year old. What a complete douchebag.

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  7. the fat kid by advocate_one · · Score: 5, Funny

    on the fuddruckers webpage isn't a very good advert for their product... really... the kid is already obese...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  8. Hrmmm..... by toastyman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, you're upset someone is using something you created without giving you credit or asking permission, but you copied the gameplay and name from another company's game without crediting them in any way or getting permission?

  9. It's a whole new Golden Rule! by tmoertel · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Let me get this straight. This guy is outraged that a high-traffic site would link to him, chewing up his bandwidth, and his "solution" is to redirect all of that traffic to some other sites that host pictures of slaughterhouses, driving those poor guys into ground:
    EDIT: Apparently the slaughterhouse sites are getting hammered... they might take a while to load.
    I guess his Golden Rule reads like this: Feel free to do unto others what has been done to you.

    Apparently, his sense of moral outrage is not transitive.

  10. Furthermore... by CarbonJackson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He has the URL of his website right there on the opening screen. So while they're stealing what looked to be 5% of his traffic, they're also directing people to his website. Wow, someone in corporate America assumed a little bit too much, what would have been wrong with a polite to the webmaster? And why not just change the URL? Instead he decides to expose people to graphic images because they made the mistake of going to the Fudrucker's website? Sheesh. Chill out.

    --

    MikeAtIF*ckStuffedAnimalsDotCom
  11. They'll be sorry now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    From: Justin Daniels
    Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2005 19:056:32 -0400
    To: webmaster
    Subject: Complaint about your website

    To Whom It May Concern;

    Upon returning from a birthday party at one of your restaurants in Atlanta, my ten year old son wanted to look at the Fuddrucker's website. Normally, I am very restrictive on what Joshua may view, but I was confident that the content on your website would be child appropriate.

    Much to my dismay, my son became very upset at something he saw on your site. When I went to investigate, I discovered numerous pop-up browser windows detailing how cows are killed and slaughtered, and ground into hamburger meat! This information was thrust upon him when he clicked on a link to a game called "BurgerTime" from your so-called "Fuddrockers" page, which appears to be intended for children.

    My child is still upset, and it has taken my wife almost an hour to calm him down. Now he has said he will never eat a hamburger again, and has been repeatedly apologizing for helping "kill the cows".

    I am absolutely appalled that you post this sort of information on your website. It is my duty, as a parent, to teach my children where meat comes from.

    I can safely say that my family and I will never step foot in another Fuddrucker's restaurant after this traumatic evening.

    Justin Daniels
    Atlanta, Georgia

  12. Re: Sounds like slashdot, no? by vettemph · · Score: 3, Funny
    a major company such as [who ever], with countless hits per day, linking like this to a site, without even notifying the site to verify if they have the bandwidth available,

    The fuddrucker effect?

    --
    The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
  13. I wonder how the slaughterhouse people feel =) by starvingartist12 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What would have been cooler is having all the Slaughterhouse websites retaliate against the Burgertime guy and call him names for using up their content/bandwidth.

    Now that's a story =)

  14. But in all seriousness people!` by bobbyw · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now how the fuck am I going to play burgertime?

  15. www.fuddrruckers.com by matthew.thompson · · Score: 4, Informative

    Is anyone else just getting the google homepage when they go to www.fuddruckers.com ?

    --
    Matt Thompson - Actuality - Insert product here.
    1. Re:www.fuddrruckers.com by Da+w00t · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yep, they did it again. Now they're linking to google!

      --

      da w00t. mtfnpy?
  16. What the fuck? by Mirkon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Talk about "incredibly stupid" web developers, how about a guy who redirects unsuspecting consumers to his personal diatribe and some intrusive pop-ups?

    FFS, complain to the company, move the file, restrict access from that referrer - but jesus, this is the kind of jackassery that makes people hate the Web.

    --
    Glog!
    1. Re:What the fuck? by lxs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not in the US, so people here aren't suffering the kind of moral panic you seem to have succumbed to.

      Television serves up sex and violence on a daily basis and children are exposed to many of the things the "guardians of morality" are decrying. Society hasn't broken down, my country has very low teenage pregnancy rates and a low crime rate. Children do get to see the bad / strange side of the world and that tends to make them more socially engaged, more tolerant and better informed.

      There is nothing wrong with showing the customers where meat comes from, even the children. If they can't handle that truth, they shouldn't be eating meat in the first place.
      I'm not a vegetarian, I eat meat on a daily basis, but I believe in treating the animals well in life, killing them quickly and slaughtering them efficiently.

      Oh and by the way, the word 'cunt' is the most widely used expletive in my language (only it's an adjective around here) it's bandied about by everybody both in real life and on television day and night, even in polite conversation. It lost it's power to shock twenty years ago.

    2. Re:What the fuck? by jpn · · Score: 3, Funny
      Oh and by the way, the word 'cunt' is the most widely used expletive in my language (only it's an adjective around here) it's bandied about by everybody both in real life and on television day and night, even in polite conversation. It lost it's power to shock twenty years ago.
      Reminds me of the time that the Pope and one of his cardinals were traveling by train. The Pope who was doing a crossword puzzle, looked up and asked his cardinal "What's a four letter word ending in '-unt' that means 'woman'?" The cardinal blushed, became rather flustered, and after a few moments of indecision blurted out "Aunt! It's 'aunt'!" The Pope said "Of course! I should have known. Can I borrow your eraser?"
  17. Slashdot Logic by oskard · · Score: 3, Funny

    Let me get this straight. Homeboy complains about his bandwidth getting jacked, thus DoSing his web server. So we slashdot him? BRILLIANT.

    --
    Sigs are for Terrorists.
  18. There's stupid and then there's stupid by The+Empiricist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most of the comments seem to focus on the morality of what the Fuddruckers webmaster (of html-peon) did or on what Mr. Briggs did. I think I even saw a comment on how stupid Fuddruckers must be.

    What I haven't seen is the suggestion that perhaps Mr. Briggs passed up a modestly lucrative opportunity to profit a bit from his originally selfless efforts. After all, it's obvious that someone at Fuddruckers liked his game. He might have been able to convince them to legally purchase the rights, or at least agree to indemnify him if the original creators of the BurgerTime game ever decided to sue Mr. Briggs based on copyright infringement. Perhaps he might have convinced them to purchase a tweaked version of the game, customized for Fuddruckkers.

    Instead, he decided to make a rather malicious effort to embarrass them, poisoning any potential commercial relationship. But, the opportunity to rant and show off modest technological l33t skillz was apparently enough to offset the potential of acquiring base, material crap such as money.

    1. Re:There's stupid and then there's stupid by patio11 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly. Why couldn't he have made a five minute phone call? "Hiya, glad you like my flash game. I was wondering if you'd be interested in purchasing a special Fuddruckers branded version? Given that I already have the game mostly ready, this could be done for very, very cheaply next to your website budget -- you feel free to make an offer, but I'm thinking mid four figures would do nicely. Of course, if you don't take me up on this offer, I'm going to have to ask that you not link directly to my game. It costs me bandwidth, you realize, and you're the only one who benefits." Heck, given that you get someone different from the HTML peon they might be happy to send you money just to eliminate the threat of you suing them.

  19. The word has been redefined by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So someone is punishing another person for using a hotlink on the web?
    I imagine you, like me, recall the day when "hotlink" was just another term for "link." Back then, having as many "hotlinks" to you as possible was a great thing.

    People have gradually redefined the word, though, and now it no longer carries positive connotations. The current definition of "hotlink" is something like "to embed content in your web site which references an absolute URI on another web site." This practice used to be called image stealing or bandwidth stealing, but I guess those weren't buzzword-worthy enough.

    I guess even with that definition, what Fuddrucker's did doesn't really qualify. What they're really guilty of is just plain asshattery, and it's possible that the "victim" is just perpetrating more of the same. His LiveJournal post includes this edit:

    EDIT: Apparently the slaughterhouse sites are getting hammered... they might take a while to load.
    So, presumably, he's not hosting the slaughterhouse images himself, but he's redirecting Fuddrucker's traffic to innocent third parties... The very thing he's pissed off at Fuddrucker's for doing.
    --
    "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
  20. Hotlinking != Hyperlinking by MAdMaxOr · · Score: 5, Informative

    We all know what hyperlinking is. Hotlinking is different.

    Hotlinking is the practice of taking someone else's resources, typically images, sounds, flash files, etc, and displaying them inline in your own HTML page. This causes losses to the creator because they still have to pay for the bandwidth of serving the file, but reap no benefits. For example, the creator may have advertising around the page with the Flash game that never gets seen.

    Hotlinking is generally seen as very bad form among web developers.

  21. Re:please educate me, Oh Mighty /. : why is this b by CrashPoint · · Score: 5, Informative
    I don't understand. From the screenshot of the fuddruckers site, it clearly gives the url and email of the flash game site... so how is this stealing content?

    The Fuddrucker's site doesn't give the URL and email, that's only showing up in the game itself. Fudd's doesn't credit the author in any way on their own site.

    Furthermore, as several have already noted, this type of link also constitutes bandwith theft.

    Wouldn't a small-time flash developer want this sort of exposure?

    No. I can say that with utmost confidence, being one myself.

    Doing some sort of goatse move to poor kids who are expecting to play a game is just wrong. This guy should be taken to court or something for indecent exposure.

    RTFA. He didn't put up anything obscene, he put up images from a slaughterhouse. And even if he had put up something obscene, the idea of taking him to court would be ridiculous. He's free to put whatever content he likes on his own site (provided the content itself is legal), and he's not obligated to preserve anything that someone else links to.

  22. To have the right... by mccalli · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The exact wording might be incorrect, but the quote which springs to mind readily is this one:

    "To have the right to do something is not the same as being right to do it"

    I agree Fuddruckers has the right to link to his site. I agree he has the right to change his content. I completely disagree that he was right to change his content in such a manner.

    I mean, this company has just given him a compliment. "Hey", they said. "This game is cool". And how does the complimentee respond? By kicking virtual sand in their face because it generates too much interest. Something wrong with just putting a static 'Thanks for the interest, but we can't cope with the bandwidth right now' message up? Ie. being pleasant and polite?

    And since the guy's getting so self-righteous, I assume he has permission from the copyright holders of Burgertime to clone their game and shove it up on the web for free in the first place, right? I mean, a person so certain of right and wrong must> have done that first, musn't he.

    Cheers,
    Ian

    1. Re:To have the right... by shellbeach · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And how does the complimentee respond? By kicking virtual sand in their face because it generates too much interest. Something wrong with just putting a static 'Thanks for the interest, but we can't cope with the bandwidth right now' message up? Ie. being pleasant and polite?

      The funniest thing of all is that the amount of bandwidth fuddruckers was taking up was 5% or less, judging by the graph on his site. I mean, sheesh, what a loser this guy is - not only does he get upset that someone thought his work worthwhile enough to link to, but then he actually thinks his response was not only justified but also pretty damn clever. He writes - and you can see him smirking all the way - "But did I do this right away? No! I waited until the Friday evening before a three-day weekend. So either it'll be up for three days, or someone is going to have to go in during their vacation to fix it. My only hope is that an executive from Fuddruckers finds out about it before that happens. Because, really, stupidity like that deserves losing your job over."

      So, yes, Fuddruckers should have sent the guy an email out of courtesy, but that's the only way that I can see that they did anything wrong. An acknowledgement on their website would also have been nice, but considering the game clearly states on the main page who it was written by that's hardly necessary. But these things didn't seem to upset the game's author anyway - what he seemed most pissed off about was that Fuddruckers had linked to his game, rather than copying it and hosting it on their site. Now, there's no obvious copyright on the games and nothing to suggest that they're open source or public domain ... so surely it would have been much worse if Fuddruckers had copied the game and placed it on their site!? That would have been a possible breach of copyright, after all!

  23. Take the time to RTFA... by martian67 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you would take the time to read the article, you would notice that the games author had his website embeded inside the flash file (free advertising), and that it was not a large or even a particualrly stressful amount of bandwidth, but yet he chose to do something incredibly malicious back to them without even bothering to ask them to remove link. And the fact he take others content and does not give credit, but yet gets angry when the same is done to him is more than a little hypocrytical....

    1. Re:Take the time to RTFA... by tang · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >Do you have evidence for this, because if you do it would >certainly turn the tables on him...

      Well, he did write a Burgertime clone, was he the original Burgertime creator? Does he have a notice posted giving the original creators of Burgertime credit? Nope.

      >As for "...he chose to do something incredibly malicious..." well >I disagree. If someone stole something from me
      Noone stole from him. They LINKED to a game on his website. That game still had a splash with his website URL and contact info.

      >If Fuddruckers had an ounce of decency they should reimburse >the expenses this guy has incurred on their behalf (while not >his major referred, they still consumed finite resources).
      He put content on the WWW. Fuddruckers LINKED to it. They did not do anything wrong! That is the way the internet works. You put things on the internet, people find them and link to them. Just because a company did it they need to reimburse someone ,when sites like slashdot and fark link to tons of sites, should they be paying bandwidth to every site they link?

    2. Re:Take the time to RTFA... by HD+Webdev · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He put content on the WWW. Fuddruckers LINKED to it. They did not do anything wrong! That is the way the internet works. You put things on the internet, people find them and link to them. Just because a company did it they need to reimburse someone ,when sites like slashdot and fark link to tons of sites, should they be paying bandwidth to every site they link?

      Not to mention, at the linked site it says "EDIT: Apparently the slaughterhouse sites are getting hammered... they might take a while to load."

      Does this mean that he's stealing bandwidth from slaughterhouse sites by not even bothering to host the pictures himself?

      That's what I think. After all, he says that those sites are getting hammered now with the valid assumption that it's because of him.

      Pot, kettle, blacker.

      --
      This is not a dream, not a dream...we are transmitting from the year 1-9-9-9.
  24. Burger Time game is copyrighted by xirtam_work · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm sorry to say that the game that the Flash developer created is based upon a copyrighted arcade game (by Namco I think). He has not credited the owner of the copyright nor asked permission to make his own re-creation of their game. He even used the exact same name. If he wants to be so righteous about it he can first either get permission or remove the game from the web.

    The same would go for a Tetris or Pacman 'clone. Sorry to say that many of the games that we all think of as generic were designed and programmed by someone and they own it.

    As for his actions simply denying access and popping up a message saying that the content is unauthorised due to hot-linking policies asking Fuddruckers to contact him would have been a lot more productive. Was he within his rights to do what he did - yes. Was it a professional thing to do - no. As it stands he is either immature or looking for publicity.

  25. Fun with old hotlinked images... by nuxx · · Score: 4, Funny

    Recently I upgraded my personal photo gallery to a new version of software, eliminating the need for a publicly accessible directory full of images. Well, since my site has been around for a few years, I've collected a goodly number of people at sites like LiveJournal, Xanga, MySpace, and various other sites who have taken to linking some of my full res photos (2MB-5MB each) as the background for their sites.

    Most of these sites are especially crappy, and as such, the bandwidth used wasn't much, so for the time being I didn't do anything about it.

    Well, with the removal of the albums directory, I decided to redirect all requests for images in it to this annoyingly animated strobing GIF. This has the wonderful affect of making many, many crappy sites blink horribly. Like this and this.

  26. I agree, the guy is a dick by John+Seminal · · Score: 4, Insightful
    from the idiots website: But did I do this right away? No! I waited until the Friday evening before a three-day weekend. So either it'll be up for three days, or someone is going to have to go in during their vacation to fix it.

    You couldn't email them to find out what was going on? You knew they were "stealing" your game, but you waited? So between the time you knew they were "stealing" and the time you got even, did you give them permission to use your game?

    Yeah, that's right. They didn't even bother to download the game and host it themselves. They linked to my game, using my game and my bandwidth to promote their restaurant.

    Let me get this right. They put a link on their website. They did not steal your code. They did not pass off the game as their own. I see at the bottom of the game, in BIG LETTERS your email of games@briggster.com. And I see the URL of your webiste.

    Since when is putting up a link stealing. I can understand if they put an image on your website and hotlink it, that is theft. But since when is linking the same as stealing?

    So, if I put a link on my website to The Onion, am I stealing from The Onion every time someone who visits my page then goes to visit theirs? Because I see you link to a ton of stuff from your blog. Did you get permission from each and every place before you linked to their website?

    And how much traffic did Fudruckkers send your way? Looking at that pie graph, it looks like 2% or so. Who is that Saionji.net? They are "stealing" far more from you.

    This guy should be arrested. He knew that Fuddruckers was linking. He did nothing about it. He waited until he could hurt Fuddruckers the most.

    This is no different than if I see a neighbors kid walking on MY lawn. It is MY property. But I don't tell the kid to stop doing it. Instead I wait the day before the kids family has their summer vacation trip, with paid airline tickets. Then I dig a small hole, and cover it up with leaves. I put nails all over, and cover them up. I put stuff out for the kid to trip on and get cut up. HA! That will teach them, the family will loose their vacation and I'll have shown them.

    This guy is a waste of a human life. In days with people suffering because of Katrina, this guy wants to cause a little more suffering. Instead of being proud that someone thought his game was good enough to link to, this guy decided to be a dick. He is no different than the looters who steal 40 pairs of shoes. He had an oppertunity to hurt someone, and he did it. He did not take even one effort to try and resolve his issue in a civilized way. Hell, Fuddruckers is a fairly large company, if he would have complained nicely, they might have paid him for any bandwith they used. Fuddruckers would not want the bad press. But now, Fuddruckers comes out as the victims, and this guy comes out as the dick. There is a moral to this story that kids should learn.

    I am going to laugh when the follow-up story comes out on slashdot, about how Fuddruckers sues his ass.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

  27. Re:Two wrongs.. by deep44 · · Score: 3, Funny

    After further review, I've determined that three "wrongs" actually bring justice to this situation (very complex equations involved; not enough time to figure out how to print all those funny mathematical symbols in HTML). Anyway, here's my solution:

    # while true ; do
    > wget http://games.briggster.com/media/burgertime.swf
    > rm burgertime.swf
    > done

    *yawn* Goodnight.

  28. Waaay overboard by flakac · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This guy needs to chill out. Instead of reacting in a knee-jerk, vindictive fashion, he could have:
    1. Simply restricted access to the game for all requests with a referrer of fuddruckers.com by configuring the web server.
    2. Contacted the webmaster and politely discuss options for hosting and credit. Who knows if he could have even made some money and publicity out of the deal.
    3. Redirected requests coming from fuddruckers.com to a page explaining why he thinks hotlinking is wrong.
    Instead, he decides to show the world that he's an immature jerk, and in so doing reinforce public opinion of geeks as being primarily anti-social losers.
  29. No, you're just ignorant by mikeswi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First of all, learn the difference between hyperlinking and hotlinking. Hyperlinking means you link to another site from your own, which is what you were talking about. Hotlinking means you load something on your site that is located on someone else's site. The other site has to deal with the bandwidth use of both sites. That's THEFT.

    Second, your analogy is about as relevent to the story as the price of bat shit in Trinidad.

    Finally, Fuddruckers doesn't come out as a victim in any imaginable way and they don't have a legal case good enough to survive the first court hearing.

    The flash file was his. It was located on his server. What he chooses to do with the files on his own server is his own business.

  30. Tips by t_allardyce · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For anyone in a similar situation, remember to follow the simple 6 steps:

    1. Is your content stolen are copyrighted by someone else itself? If so, tread carefully or use this as an excuse to say you were complying and removing copyrighted material from your site. Don't attempt to modify the content however

    2. Is the hot-linker outside your country? This will add another layer of covering your ass, if not then be careful about what you put up

    3. Is your website linked to your real identity? obviously if it is you want to bare that in mind, for your reputation and your legal protection.

    4. Subtlety is good, if you can make it look like an accident then all the better, but if you want to put your own personal touch in so they know who they are dealing with. Shock tactics (goatse.cx) are great but remember that is likely to lead to legal action when one of their customers tries to sue them so be careful and follow step 5:

    5. Use pop-ups if you want plausible deniability. Most people use IE and most IE users have pop-up infested machines anyway - you could always blame it on that and most non-technical people wont challenge it. BTW I said pop-ups, I didn't say how big they should be, take advantage.

    6. Don't abuse the target pages copyrighted material, logos etc, don't use javascript to attack their page in any way outside of the given construct of the hot-link, that might be seen as breaking in somehow

    I think the most effective thing would have been to replace the game with a single image of a burger being made with a turd.

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  31. www.fuddruckers.com now points to google.com by entirety · · Score: 5, Informative

    Absolutely fascinating! I hope they did not point everything dere. host www.fuddruckers.com www.fuddruckers.com has address 66.102.7.99 whois -h whois.arin.net 66.102.7.99 OrgName: Google Inc. OrgID: GOGL Address: 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway City: Mountain View StateProv: CA PostalCode: 94043 Country: US

  32. Hotlinking vs Hyperlinking by psyon1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hyperlinking:
    Domain.com

    With a hyperlink, the owner of a site acknowledges Domain.com as the creator of content, and links to the site to show people its content.

    Hotlinking:

    With hotlinking, the visitor never knows that domain.com is the provider of the image used. Domain.com gets no exposure, has no opportunity to generate revenue, and has to foot a bill for bandwidth.

    A few posters have mentioned that the game authors email and url were on the front of the game, but that is honestly irrelevant. Would Fudruckers have linked to him if he did not have the URL on his game? Also, if Fudruckers would have linked to an HTML page on his site, he would have had an opportunity to place banner ads on his page to generate some revenue. By displaying the game directly, only 1% of the visitors might actually click that link, which gives him less of an opportunity to generate revenue.

    Nobody has the right to hotlink to content. Yes, there are ways to block hotlinking, but a webmaster should not be obligated to prevent people from doing so. If I leave my house unlocked, that does not give the public the right to walk in.