- From: Rolf H. Nelson <rnelson@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 17:03:18 -0500
- To: ronron@techunix.technion.ac.il
- CC: www-annotation@w3.org
>>>>> "Ron" == Ron Zalman <ronron@techunix.technion.ac.il> writes: > Hi, I've just put the first draft of my paper "Web Annotation - > An Overview" online. Please refer to: > http://www-ee.technion.ac.il/~ronz/annotation/ From section 3.2.1.: Publicity costs lots of money and annotation of commercials is very cheap, and may cause sever implications. Annotations are likely to get a lot of people with a lot of money really annoyed. This means that generally, not too many people who have the funds to support the global annotation system have great interest in it. Moreover, third-party web annotation may become the issue of many copyright lawsuits. It is unclear who wins these trials, but the inevitability of these is surely a deterrent. It may be appropriate to head this controversy off by providing a way for companies to put up a `No Annotations Here' marker on their web site. This could be similar to the robots.txt file that is already used to limit the activities of web spiders. The down side of have a 'no annotations' marker is that there are some sites out there that really should be annotated [Gr99]. On the other hand, the control of a global annotation system gives lots of power to the firm who owns it. Negative publicity can be filtered out, and a lot of other publicity may be put in. This means that having a web annotation system on commercial hands may be worse than not having one at all. You make two points: that annotating pages could be perceived as a copyright violation, and that the controller of a global annotations system could filter out negative publicity. Do you believe these points apply to all annotation systems, or only to "in place annotations" where the actual content of the original document is modified? I would argue that "off place annotations" like alexa uses, where it is clear what the original document says and what the annotation adds as editorial, do not have this problem. Adding commentary that is obviously delimited from the main text would probably not be a copyright violation, in my non-expert opinion. Otherwise many many companies would currently be fighting massive lawsuits. Furthermore, I would prefer a world with a single tightly controlled "off place" annotation system to a world with no annotation systems whatsoever. (Of course, I would prefer a world with many competing distributed annotaton systems to either choice.) -Rolf p.s. Great paper! -- | Rolf Nelson (rolf@w3.org), Project Manager, W3C at MIT | "Try to learn something about everything | and everything about something." --Huxley
Received on Tuesday, 16 March 1999 17:03:36 UTC