Re: Copy to Clipboard - ambush and abuse by javascript

I completely agree with Roy on this.

Roy T. Fielding writes:
 > 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?
 > What do book publishers do with their copyrighted content?
 > Do they use trick watermarking to make it hard to photocopy?
 > No.  They use the courts to enforce copyright.
 > Copyright is comparatively easy to enforce, and (at least in
 > US) law bends over backwards in favor of the copyright owner
 > with very steep per-copy charges.  The easiest way to discover
 > stolen content is to search for unique phrases, and that works
 > regardless of the cut-and-paste tool used to copy them.  What
 > is much harder is finding the entity responsible for publishing
 > the illegal copies once they are found.
 > However, almost all cut-and-paste style interaction via a
 > browser is for the sake of fair use, which is entirely legal in
 > the US no matter who owns the copyright.  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.
 > While I support the notion of not messing with the cut buffer
 > for UI sanity (i.e., allowing this is a browser bug), I think
 > it is pointless to argue about this tool as a legitimate means
 > of copy control.
 > ....Roy

Best Regards,

Title:  Research Scientist                              
Google: tv+raman                                        

Received on Thursday, 10 June 2010 21:00:52 UTC