Re: Arrested - re: TAG ISSUE-25 deep linking

On 3/9/2011 12:46 PM, Larry Masinter wrote:
 > I thought we discussed this before and had come to some conclusions, but 
perhaps not.This is not primarily about deep linking, which is what our 
earlier discussions about. Although, for now, ISSUE-25 is the closest, this 
is about the assertion that links to copyright material can constitute 
infringement of that copyright; the deep linking argument is basically the 
claim that you can link to something like a site's home page, but not to 
the pages "behind" that page (distinctions I don't necessarily endorse, 
advocates of a no-deep-linking policy do).


 >  What I remember is:
 >
 > * the TAG would not issue legal opinions

I'm not sure we made a long term commitment, but I personally don't think 
we are competent to issue such opinions, certainly not without first 
getting the advice of counsel.  What we can do, and might wish to do here, 
is to explain to those who do work with the law how the Web is designed, 
and what some of the technical, architectural, and to the extent we are 
competent to judge, social implications are of using or prohibiting use of 
various Web mechanisms.

 > * the TAG might author something about conventions for deep linking and 
standard industry practice

We have published [1], and could do more.

 > * This would be best and most effective if the document were open for 
full community review and reflected consensus

[1] was so reviewed, and we might do similar things in the future. I think 
it's also well within our charter to provide advice to Tim in his role as 
director, and to the W3C team, regarding matters like this. I see no 
obligation in all cases to seek public review first, though there may be 
often be value in doing so.

Noah

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/deeplinking-20030911

Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 17:58:43 UTC