A Xanadu transclude - or the moral equivalents in HTML today - isn't the same as merely a "reference", like an HTML link or a citation footnote in a book. The l

A Xanadu transclude - or the moral equivalents in HTML today - isn't the same as merely a "reference", like an HTML link or a citation footnote in a book. The latter just tells you to go look at another thing; but what Xanadu wanted was that the system would create a whole work out of your additions and the original work (in the same way that, say, a dynamic linker would). This isn't a reference, it's a copy, and the argument then comes down to where the copying actually happens and who should be liable for it. That being said, while looking for court cases that supported "transclusion equals derivative work", it turns out this is actually more contentious among actual judges than I thought. If you ask the 9th Circuit, embedding by reference doesn't violate copyright because infringement is stored in the server[0]. If you ask other courts this is obviously wrong[1]. My gut feeling is still that the 9th is wrong on this, because embedding by reference not tripping copyright opens up a huge loophole in the law[2]. Think about how many low-effort articles are just "X is going viral" plus an embed of X - that's exactly the sort of behavior copyright is intended to prohibit. And given that we live with a legal regime that's obsessed in drowning the world in "innovation" and "intellectual property", I don't see how "evade licensing photos by just embedding them off the photographer's Instagram" is going to stay legal. Putting that aside, if a reuse of a work by transclusion fell under Fair Use, then you wouldn't need the Xanadu payment system in order to license it anyway. You would be free to just reupload the portions of the work being fairly reused and not pay. So even if paid transclusion wiped away infringement, it would still be a tax on fair users (in the same way that YouTube Content ID is). Compulsory licensing probably wouldn't matter much as copyright has very few situations in which you can purchase such a license. The ability to refuse to sell a license at any price is considered a key feature of the law by the copyright maximalists. [0] https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/instagram-dodges-photogs-copyright-lawsuit-over-embedding-feature-2021-09-20/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/instagram-dodges... [1] https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/manhattan-judge-rejects-server-test-internet-copyright-infringement-2021-07-30/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/manhattan-judge-... https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-otc-panic/n-y-judge-says-embedded-tweets-may-violate-copyrights-but-dont-panic-idUSKCN1G02L8 https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-otc-panic/n-y-judge...