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

On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Roy T. Fielding <> wrote:
> On Mar 11, 2011, at 9:04 AM, Aaron Swartz wrote:
>> Does the TAG want to rewrite the Web specs so that certain kind of
>> tags (e.g. embed and img, but not a) carry the implication "I have
>> verified that the content published at this URL is not published in
>> violation of copyright law"? That strikes me as insane; copyright laws
>> vary significantly from country to country and even if we decide to
>> limit the World Wide Web to just the US, the leading experts in the
>> field agree that US law is so ambiguous there is no way to be certain
>> whether a published work is infringing or not.
> Copyright laws are not so much about the act of moving bits, but
> rather the ability to control revenue obtained from the use of
> copyrighted expressions.  In almost all cases that I have read
> (IANALbiswtmtwt), transclusion of unlicensed content for the
> sake of profit is illegal.

This is helpful, Roy. Could you provide references to some of these cases?


Received on Friday, 11 March 2011 21:43:15 UTC