You miss the point. The point is that this is a person who has a documented
history of not being an outspoken supporter of xxxxxx issue. Then something
happens that mekes this person change. That is all.
<gabriel> wrote in message> > IMHO this means precisely nill. My objection is that for some reason
I got the point. My point is that there are a lot of people out there who
previously didn't have an opinion who now think that the administration
should do whatever it feels necessary (BTW, I don't think this - it is just
an example). My point is that inexplicably, entertainers' opinions are
given more credibility than mine for example.
Of course. They have taller soapboxes.
"Take care of the luxuries and the necessities will take care of themselves."
Thanks to all who replied to my question. What I have found out is,
there has been a case ruled on by U.S. District Court Judge in
California. A snipit from www.chillingeffects.org says............
Question: Is "deep linking" illegal?
Answer: "Deep linking" refers to the creation of hyperlinks to a page
other than a website's homepage. For example, instead of pointing a link
at http://www.chillingeffects.org , this site's "homepage," another site
might link directly to the linking FAQ at
Some website owners complain that deep links "steal" traffic to their
homepages or disrupt the intended flow of their websites. In particular,
Ticketmaster has argued that other sites should not be permitted to send
browsers directly to Ticketmaster event listings. Ticketmaster settled
its claim against Microsoft and lost a suit against Tickets.com over
From Ticketmaster v. Tickets.com opinion:
Further, hyperlinking does not itself involve a violation of the
Copyright Act (whatever it may do for other claims) since no copying is
involved. The customer is automatically transferred to the particular
genuine web page of the original author. There is no deception in what
is happening. This is analogous to using a library's card index to get
reference to particular items, albeit faster and more efficiently.
So far, courts have found that deep links to web pages were neither a
copyright infringement nor a trespass.
So, I guess we're OK.
Just to reply to a couple of the post.
I have, and will continue to remove any link that the web site
owner request. This is done without any hesitation.
My site has frames, so I have the links set up to open in a "new"
window so there will be no mistake what site you are on.
There are no files of any kind "hot-linked". Any thing downloaded
from one of the sites is from them, not me.
Again, thanks for all the replies. As usual, this group can be counted
on for help. Oh yeah, I did put my URL back into my signature.
Inside every older person is a younger person wondering what the hell
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 16:46:50 GMT, "Frank Ketchum"
I agree. It means no credibility, but equally no lack of credibility.
Then I read the article and find it to be a pretty good first
introduction to why the Patriot Act is such an oppressive and shameful
This is always a risk, granted. But Rickie Lee Jones is hardly
The law has always been the property of those most able to pay for it,
and this has been especially true in America.
Since some time in the 19th century, American government and law has
existed to support the aims of the biggest businesses. Sometimes it
has a little swing the other way (the anti-trust actions against the
oil companies) but it's generally the case that any business big
enough becomes either above the law, or is capable of bending the law
at its whim.
If you or I wear black assault vests, threaten someone with violent
"arrest" and remove their property, then it's called assault and
robbery. However the RIAA seem to be able to do this without any
redress or even the involvement of a court.
I saw a film tonight. There's now a trailer warning at the start,
threatening 10 year jail sentences for anyone taking photographs of
it. What's a typical sentence for violent assault in your locale ?
Try building a website that offers MP3s for download (several of my
friends have bands). Then take a look at your website and firewall
logs to see the interest the music publishing companies take. If your
title happens to overlap one of their artist's title, then look out
for the cease & desist letter about one of your own songs ! (and
titles aren't even copyrightable, let alone that fact that it's a
totally different song)
Do whales have krillfiles ?
First, IANAL (I am not a lawyer)
Next. Howard described "bandwidth stealing" very well (at least it's
consistant with my own definition). However, on the broader subject of
"breaking the law", if you are really concerned you need to ask a lawyer
whose specializes in this field. Free does not mean "public domain". The
source(s) you're linking too may have copyright and your method of linking
may violate this.
Finally. In general, you should ask permission to link to someone else's
website. If they refuse, or ask after the fact to be removed, you should
honor the request (IMO)
|I'm not advertising a site or company. I have removed the URL from my
|signature for this reason. This is a legitimate question. I have been
|approached to remove all of my links because I'm stealing. I need some
|If a web site has links to other sites for free plans, patterns,
|articles, etc, that are opened in a new window with that site's address
|showing in the address bar, does this constitute stealing? This is on a
|non-commercial site with links to 100's of Free Plans and Industry
|Links, of which all are of interest to woodworkers, and not requiring
|anything in return.
|I know there are many other sites doing the same thing. So, are we all
|breaking the law? Should we fight to maintain our sites or remove
|everything? I don't see where this is any different than saving the URL
|as a favorite in your "Favorites" folder.
|All comments welcomed and appreciated.
You've gotten a lot of good advice on the potential legalities that I
won't expand upon. However, as a practical matter, what are they
going to do to you if you don't comply?
I'll give a couple of examples where I was the "victim" so to speak
and yet am helpless to do much about it.
1) I wrote a technical paper that was published in an amateur radio
publication. With their permission, I put a copy on my web site,
along with some further information. I recently saw another paper
that cited me as a reference and gave a link to my paper *on someone
else's web site.* Not a link mind you; the actual pdf file. I email
him and asked what the hell was going on and got zero response. What
can I do about it? Nothing. Technically the publisher could go after
him for copyright violation but we are in the US and he is in Canada.
2) I described gadget in another article that was published in a now
defunct ham radio publication. Shortly after publication I was
flooded with letters requesting that I make a kit of parts and circuit
boards available. I fronted several $K to do this only to discover
that in the next issue there was a ad for a new kit company and their
first offering was "my" design. Oh, the owner of the new company?
Why it was the editor of the magazine. What could I do about it from
a legal standpoint? Nothing. (I sold all of my stuff and more BTW
since I wasn't trying to make a profit. I hope I burned his ass.)
So, unless you're up against Microsoft, GM or Wally World, what's
going to happen to you? Are they going to come to your town, hire a
lawyer and file suit? If you think so, then take the stuff down;
otherwise get a good night's sleep.
I can't see a problem saying, for such and such, go here. Obviously
they are reading the peoples cookies and seeing what directed the
viewers to the mystery webpages. Unless you are behind some kind of
denial of service attack. I take it you are not using anything
trademarked on your site. But I suppose just take it off as it isn't
worth the hassle. Who was it?
Jake Jarvis wrote:
Hey, I agreed with you concerning the 'reading cookies' bit, I was
just pointing out that for statistic analysis, many sites use
http_referrer - even though not secure.
I certainly wouldn't trust them for anything important, but how
important could knowing OS, browser and referring URL be? ;-)
Most web surfers don't bother spoofing, and they can reveal minutely
interesting trends (at best).
Shoot, is there anything you don't dabble in? <g>
"Dabble"!!?? ... I don't "dabble", I _conquer_ ideas and concepts at every
opportunity and bend them to my will! ;>)
Besides, I haven't told you about the buffalo hunting, brumby wrangling,
bare-knuckle fist fighting days, and other careers ... yet. <g>
"Dabble" .. hummpph!
Thought I was kidding didn't you? You betcha ... but they were rideable, for
the most part, and were used, along with a small fleet of Land Rovers, to
hunt wild water buffalo in Arnhem Land and Cape York peninsula area in the
early 60's. The guy I worked for exported the meat to the US for pet food
... don't get me started. ;>)
BTW, I am still looking a for a BIG planer.
Some browsers have built-in facilities for spoofing them. It is in this
fashion that I must visit Home Despot's web site, for example. It won't
talk to me unless it thinks I'm running either Nutscrape or Internet
Exploder, so I have Konqueror masquerade as Internet Exploder in order to
trick it into permitting me access. (The site works perfectly well after
One more reason I like Lowe's better than Home Despot. Lowe's requires no
(Fortunately, Konqueror is pretty clever in this regard. It has a list of
what it needs to pretend to be at which sites, so this is all transparent
once initially configured on a per site basis.)
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan < firstname.lastname@example.org>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
That's helpful. Why the grandstanding? Children watching?
Well I thought it could be done somehow. Where is there a law written
that you cannot do this. Or did Jake sign some agreement. They are just
trying to scare him with the theft word. It's the people that use the
link that are using the bandwidth. Jake's link is on his bandwidth.
If this website is so concerned can't they rig the page so if you don't
have a cookie picked up from their intro page, you can't view a plans
page? It seems we all only dabble in it. Any consensus, without the
I want to know who it is? If they really said this to Jake he is not
compelled to keep it secret.
I looked at your free plans page and it is very nice. And you obviously
qualified the plans somewhat. Perhaps if you left the link there but
only in plain text. Say go there, for this. Then you are not linking but
providing directions to people. Who was it?????? What webpage does the
owner not want us to see??? But take down the contact information to
just a hotmail account or something.
Jake Jarvis wrote:
Bandwidth theft is when you offer access to a file stored on a web or FTP
site that is linked from one of your web pages where the target is
downloaded directly from the other location but the person downloading has
no idea of this. For example, on my web site I offer a free download of a
piece of shareware software. Another individual in the past put up a web
site also offering the same download from his site. However, when people
downloaded from his site, his code directed them to my directory, without
their knowledge, and he used my monthly download allowance to provide this
software without giving any hint as to where the file was actually stored,
and without giving the visitor a chance to view my pages.
Now, if he had simply linked to my software page, he would have been guilty
only of furthering the goals of the internet - a free exchange of
information. That's what we all want. Instead, he offered the software
under the guise of being the originator of the download but saved himself
the cost of paying for the bandwidth by making me do it for him. That is
I wouldn't worry about it. It sounds as if you are providing a directional
service for which this other person should be thankful - you are increasing
their traffic. If you were linking to an inside frame without the benefit
of their navigation bars they might suggest you use an alternate URL but
accusing you of bandwidth theft is improper as, from what you have written,
you have not done anything of the sort.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.