- From: Asbjørn Ulsberg <asbjorn@ulsberg.no>
- Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 18:01:37 +0200
- To: "Henrik Dvergsdal" <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no>, public-html@w3.org
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 16:06:54 +0200, Henrik Dvergsdal <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no> wrote: > Well, to me, the ability to include images as attachments first of all > represents a means for ordinary people to achieve a certain degree of > protection of their legal rights. Have you thought about the caching implications in multipart responses? How will the caches be invalidated, for example? > It won't affect the big corporations who have technical, financial and > legal resources to protect their content anyway. Neither will it affect > the technically skilled bad guys out there who will abuse their rights > anyway. But it will reduce the total amount of abuse and that is a good > thing, I think. How exactly will this "protection" work? Are you talking about protection against hot-linking, or is there anything else in a multipart response that protects the images in other ways? -- Asbjørn Ulsberg -=|=- asbjorn@ulsberg.no «He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»
Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2007 15:59:51 UTC