W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2010

Re: URIs, deep linking, framing, adapting and related concerns

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 19:27:13 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTim_we1Rv2gST3sCosEuMKoWfxVbP7KRwsJcx5Ng@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Cc: Rotan Hanrahan <rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com>, www-tag@w3.org
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org> wrote:
> http://www.chillingeffects.org/derivative/faq.cgi#QID380 reports on a
> case where frames were used to place ads around content picked up
> elsewhere.  This seems very similar to your example #1 of image
> inclusion. If so a court may very well one day find <img> links to
> unlicensed material to be infringing.

I don't think that's unreasonable because its meaning in the document
is not the same as an anchor link; it's linking with transclusion
semantics which could be considered as a republication of the
referenced content. Other HTML features such as frames/iframe, object,
some uses of stylesheets, and XHR of course, could be similarly
interpreted.  And yet other HTML features fall somewhere in between,
such as the cite attribute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transclusion

Mark.
Received on Friday, 17 December 2010 00:27:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:29 GMT