On 3 Jun 2010, at 00:22, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > On Jun 2, 2010, at 2:51 PM, ashok malhotra 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? > > [...] I doubt that the real > intended use of the javascript is to enforce copyright -- it is > just a marketing tool, like all the other privacy-invading > javascript junk. It is using the links to enhance cross-site > analytics, which is a privacy concern, not a copyright concern. > [...] ....Roy It is also a tool that can be used to determine the value of the content by tracking its reuse. Nowadays, links and page hits mean very little, but such content re-use by a human means engagement, etc. And it is hard to track short quotes (think n-gram fingerprinting, at web scale?) without those links. Cheers, Laurian Gridinoc http://purl.org/net/laurReceived on Thursday, 3 June 2010 00:21:11 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:34 UTC