- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 07:07:22 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Joel Sanda <joels@ecollege.com>
- cc: "''David Woolley ' '" <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>, "''w3c-wai-gl@w3.org ' '" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
No, I think that it is fantastic to use existing content where that is available and suitable (copyright, size of resource, etc). Just that there needs to be something clearly pointing out what is being linked to, and that needs to meet 3.4 itself. (aside: Dave has discussed the problem of embedding content, and I think the legal issues are fairly clear - it is an attempt to create new content that uses old content and it runs the risk of falling foul of "fair use" laws and of laws on "moral rights" - the legal right of content producers in some countries to say how content they have produced can be used. On a case by case basis these things have answers which are very similar to the answers about whether a teacher can provide photocopies of material to a class. As it happens I think it is a bad thing to illegally copy material and distribute it, but I applaud the many organisations and individuals who produce content and explicitly allow that to be done - for example by providing appropriate terms in their copyright conditions.) cheers Charles On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, Joel Sanda wrote: Would that mean dropping the linking criteria from 3.4 as it's now written? That's tough, I think, for a number of reasons: cmn agreed js I don't mean "only" linking - but giving designers and writers the opportunity to use appropriate and available existing content, linked in to their site, 3.4 becomes much more realistic.
Received on Monday, 6 August 2001 07:08:34 UTC