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

Re: Deep linking barriers in the UK: The Royal Mail

From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 20:15:31 +0900
Message-ID: <4BD818D3.1090002@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
CC: Tex Texin <textexin@xencraft.com>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, John Kemp <john@jkemp.net>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, www-tag@w3.org
Hello Jonathan,

On 2010/04/27 21:08, Jonathan Rees wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 5:00 AM, "Martin J. Dürst"
> <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>  wrote:
>> I hope that with the above distinction between Case 1 and Case 2, we can
>> find some agreement, or at least understand our differences better.
>
> I do understand better; thanks for being so clear.
>
> It hadn't occurred to me that legally there might be a distinction
> between the two cases, but you make a good case (so to speak). I don't
> think there should be, but that's just my opinion.

As I already said, I personally feel that there should be a distinction. 
But I think for the time being, we even may agree to disagree.

I think that in the Web community, there is a very strong feeling that 
Case 2 should be allowed even without asking for permission (even where 
this permission is asked for, and of course always within other limits 
of the law, such as decency, not being libelous,..., which I tihnk isn't 
at issue anyway). So I think it would help a lot if the TAG, wherever 
necessary, would make clear that this issue is about Case 2, in order 
not to get people confused, and in order not to taint the (as far as I 
understand) consensus of the Web community against freely allowing Case 2.


> It's my understanding that Case 1 happens all the time (I confess:
> http://mumble.net/) - so maybe there has already been a relevant suit,
> or if not there will be soon. I'll poke around to see if I can find
> one.

Very interested in anything you find, obviously.


[The W3C page on logos and icons may be somewhat related:
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/logo-usage-20000308
It was my understanding that W3C *required* that the logo be directly 
sourced from W3C (to allow for future logo changes), but "You may only 
post the graphic found at http://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home" doesn't 
express this directly.]


Regards,   Martin.

-- 
#-# Martin J. Dürst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp   mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp
Received on Wednesday, 28 April 2010 11:16:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:33 UTC