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

On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 7:31 AM, Henry S. Thompson <> wrote:
> It seems to me this approach is fundamentally different, from a Web
> Architecture _and_ a copyright perspective, from what
> e.g. [5] does, which is aggregate information about
> live streaming coverage of cycle races, using distant-references.  In
> particular, any attempt to describe the case as
> "just another deep-linking case" is at best a gross
> over-simplification.


Maybe what we need is a document that describes, in neutral technical
terms, how and why copying takes place on the Web, and what entities
are technically (not necessarily legally) responsible for it taking
place in various situations. Perhaps the transclusion/distant
distinction reflects a difference in who is responsible for an act of

Such an analysis falls squarely in the TAG realm, and does not get
involved in legal questions or advice. It just explains how things
work (retrieval, caching, downloads, linking, transclusion, frames,
scripts, robots, etc.) from the perspective of bits moving around.

One thing such a document could explain is the information flow around
embedded video, and why its various pieces happen.

I bet we would learn something by attempting to assign responsibility
(or causality) for each kind of copying event.

The copying question is only one aspect of the overall
linking-restriction topic, since not all attempts to restrict linking
have to do with copying. (I would link to an example but its terms of
use prohibit me.) But one thing at a time.


Received on Friday, 11 March 2011 14:52:57 UTC