RE: Re: Abuse of this list
Simply, it is altering the primary source without permission. Inclusion over referencing of a primary source is the root. Taking it and modifying with a link means the user assumes no responsibility for clicking the link. That's basic W3C lore. That is not an answer to modifying a primary source though. If the primary is modified, some boundary is crossed but it creating an unnamed but situated relationship unintended in the primary source. The author assumes responsibility for the context of the secondary source if these are part of an index. In the case of Google, algorithms pick the links from how big a domain? In the case of Stylus, however the links are chosen, to point only within the Stylus domain, yes? So their query is fairly narrow but it amplifies through Google just as spam does. That's about it. The question remains if it is copyright infringement only if challenged; otherwise, we're free to sample and represent to are heart's content. Bow can you prosecute a musician who samples and aggregates and not Google? len From: Peter [mailto:pc.subscriptions@g...] > Interestingly, though, it's only marginally different from Google's own > business model: Perhaps a boundary was crossed? From reformatting, rearranging, embedding, ... to changing/adding links. Peter
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format