3 ms·
So basically, he wants to ban the basic underlying concept behind the internet as it was conceived in the first place? It is as if he said he wants to prosecut
by TrevorJ 17y ago
So basically, he wants to ban the basic underlying concept behind the internet as it was conceived in the first place?
It is as if he said he wants to prosecute football players for battery when they tackle an opponent. By stepping on the field in a uniform you are agreeing to play inside the rules of the game. Linking is one of the rules of the game on the internet.
Couldn't we use the legal argument that posting something online without taking further steps to password protect it or what have you is implied consent for the content to be linked to?
- grellas 17y agoThere is no way that existing copyright law can even remotely be stretched to say that incidental linking to a site on the web constitutes copyright infringement. This would be akin to saying that a library's use of the Dewey decimal system to help you locate a book infringes the copyright held by the book's owner because it directs you where to find it. The judge's proposal is purely a political one and that is why it appears in a blog. Unless Congress acts to do a radical extension of current copyright law, linking of any normal type will not come under legal scrutiny of any sort, even from Judge Posner (who, whatever else he is, is nobody's fool). The danger here will lie with politicians who might succumb to lobbying pressure. It will not come from judges.
- TrevorJ 17y agoIt's more like me mentioning a book and telling you where to go to buy it is copyright infringement. Terrible idea.
- joshu 17y agos/internet/web