- From: mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 18:18:34 -0400
- To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
- Cc: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
One possible solution is to engineer user agents in a way that will prevent the "copy" action unless the content/context contains the proper rights metadata (via Creative Commons or some other agreed standard(s)). I think that is compatible with the spirit of CORS, UMP, PICS/POWDER, etc. where it's the responsibility of the content author//host to explicitly "enable" the possibly "harmful" user agent action and the responsibility of the user agent to prevent that same action unless specific meta data is provided. mca http://amundsen.com/blog/ http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 17:51, ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> wrote: > Let me argue the other side. If I make my living serving copyrighted > content, allowing > unrestricted copy/paste is handing out a license to steal/plagiarize. So, > how do I protect myself? > -- disallow copy? add a hidden watermark that can be used for legal > prosecution? > All the best, Ashok > > > Noah Mendelsohn wrote: >> >> Tim Berners-Lee wrote: >> >> > This I think seriously violates the function >> > of Copy, and the user's rights. >> >> Yes, I agree completely. It's obnoxious, unhelpful, and contrary to the >> spirit of the platform specifications for copy/paste. >> >> > Should browsers ensure that Copy is always a >> > read-only operation, unless they have INSTALLED code to do something >> > different? >> >> I agree with the spirit of what you're asking for, but I'm not sure the >> words "read-only" capture the essence of what's needed. Copy is, of course, >> an operation that identifies data for transfer, and the corresponding paste >> is necessarily an update operation on the target document or system. >> >> My deeper concern is that in fact certain sorts of data manipulation are >> expected and useful, particularly when doing format conversions as part of >> copy/paste. So, for example, if I am reading an HTML document and I select >> multiple paragraphs of text, it might well be appropriate for a copy >> operation to put at least two versions on the clipboard: >> >> HTML Clipboard format: >> <p>Text of para1</p> >> <p>Text of para2</p> >> >> Text Clipboard format: >> Text of Para 1\n >> \n\n >> Text of Para 2 >> >> I think it's important that whatever rules we set for browsers not >> prohibit such helpful re-expression of the same information using different >> formats. We need to find a formulation that encourages such useful >> reformatting, but prohibits the sort of inappropriate updates that are >> described in the Daring Fireball posting. In any case, it doesn't seem to me >> that the term "read-only" quite captures what we want. Thank you. >> >> Noah >> >> >> >> >> >> Tim Berners-Lee wrote: >>> >>> Example on MSNBC: >>> http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/29875493/ns/today-green/ >>> Very frustrating -- but a violation of the user interface. >>> >>> It is discussed by John Gruber on: >>> http://daringfireball.net/2010/05/tynt_copy_paste_jerks >>> >>> "the site uses JavaScript to report what you’ve copied to an analytics >>> server" when you perform a copy. >>> This I think seriously violates the function of Copy, and the user's >>> rights. >>> >>> Should browsers ensure that Copy is always a read-only operation, unless >>> they have INSTALLED code to do something different? >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > >
Received on Wednesday, 2 June 2010 22:19:09 UTC