Re: Web Robbery

[Ed Gregory <edgregory -at- HOME -dot- NET>]

        ARPANET, and its successor, the NSFNET, offered text only and file
transfer protocols.  When Tim Berners-Lee came along and developed the
internet's first browser in 1991 - and the first set of HTML tags, based on
SGML used in document publishing - the World Wide Web was born. A year
later, graduate student Marc Andreeson's Mosaic arrived, giving the WWW its
first graphic browser and sending development of the WWW into warp speed.
By 1994, almost all Internet traffic was moved from NSFNET (National
Science Foundation Network) to commercial servers.
        ARPANET, NSFNET, and Berners-Lee's fledgling WWW were university and
government research networks. However, the advent of the graphical
interface changed that forever. The world changed when common folk could
use the Web to view anything their little hearts desired - and bu$ine$$
found was to capitalize on that.
        Netscape, co-founded by Andreeson and the commercial successor to Mosaic,
added a function to let visitors View Source code as a way of promoting
development of the WWW as they then $aw it.  They were, in essence, holding
a virtual open house on html, trying to make it less daunting. Many early
web page developers encouraged visitors to copy their code. It was a badge
of honor to be copied.
        However, as the commercial possibilities of the web became more and more
apparent, and as business and individuals spent more and more money trying
to create unique web pages, the openness began to evaporate. A common
question on W3 mailing lists has been a plea for technology that would
prohibit anybody from viewing source code, from capturing graphics.
        Push technology, Java, SGI, and add-ins like Shockwave all helped offered
methods to protect at least part of your source code from public view.
        During all of this debate about protection of intellectual capital, there
were two basic camps. One said: "Information is meant to be free!" The
other said: "My sweat, blood, and dollars created it. You cannot use it
without my permission. I own the copyright."
        Courts quickly agreed that Web pages are copyrighted, regardless of
whether the individual posts a copyright symbol or registers the content,
just as surely as poems, songs, and essays are copyrighted.
        The Doctrine of Fair Use has taken a beating over the past five years, but
copyright still holds. People have been ordered to pull purloined content
from their Web sites.
        The Web did, indeed, originate as a tool to spread information among
universities, but that did not define the character and "purpose" of the
Web any more than Gutenberg's creation of the printing press, intended to
make the Bible available to the masses, makes every book holy scripture.

        Now to the question: I wholeheartedly agree that using information that
someone else has published in a list is not a copyright violation because
public facts cannot be copyrighted. The presentation of those facts can be
copyrighted, however. A sports score box doesn't have much protection, but
the sports writer's account of the event does.
        If you simply cut and paste a generic set of links, it would be hard to
show that there was anything original in the presentation.  However, if you
cut and past a set of links that included graphics, mouseovers, etc., then
you are stealing (potentially) original code.
        If you cut and paste the original list creator's comments on or reviews
about the sites being linked, you are violating copyright.

        One of my web pages is a list of 12-step help organizations in my area.
(http://www.members.home.com/edgregory/12step.htm)
        It is a simple tables-based presentation that includes facts that are made
available to the public by the individual organizations.  I went through a
lot of labor to drag all of the information together and create a
presentation that did not otherwise exist. The real work was not in the
html coding. Rather, it was the research - making all of the telephone
calls, keeping the meeting times current, etc.
        U.S. Patent and copyright law recognize that a new combination of existing
materials can be considered "original" enough to qualify for protection.
        All that said, I want people to copy my pages, to use them in their own
communities. A few have, others have improved upon them greatly. Over the
years, some have asked permission to copy, others have copied without
asking. It doesn't matter to me, and would matter less to the courts,
because there is no commercial value to the lists as I have presented them.

        But back to the original point: Your initial response was that it was okay
to copy, otherwise why would we have a View Source capability in our browsers?
        My answer is YAN (yet another analogy): It is not okay to break and enter,
even though we have a View Possessions capability in our windows and a Gain
Entrance capability in our sledgehammers. IOW, the ability to do a thing
does not make it legal or moral.


At 08:56 AM 1/6/99 -0500, Bill Swallow/commsoft wrote:
><snip>
>When I created my Web pages, I did not create the browser that allows
>anyone to look at source code. Having the ability to look at source code
>does not give you the right to lift it and use it as your own.  Netscape's
>browser design does not supercede federal copyright law.
><snip>
>
>That wasn't my point. The point was that it was the intent of the meduim.
>We're using what was designed as an educational and scientific resource as
>a commercial enterprise. IMHO, it sucks, but I'll be one of the last in
>line to change it, unless I win the lottery and don't have to work for a
>living. As far as lifting design and using it as your own, yeah it's wrong
>but to what end do you say "stop, thief"? 1/3 of the sites out there have
>navigation on the left hand side and a header. Half of those sites probably
>use frames. Of the half that do, half probably use image links, and half of
>those are probably enhanced by a mouseover effect.
>
>If someone steals you content, that's one thing. But a list of links? Come
>on! That list is no more yours than mine. It's a list of bookmarks. It's
>like saying you can't quote from the same authors as me. My Robert Frost!
>Mine!!!
>
>Could this guy possibly have a point?
>
>I have a personal website. I use it to share info with anyone who wants to
>read it. I keep the design basic not to thwart thieves but to make it easy
>for me to maintain. I sometimes have the pleasure to work on corporate
>sites. Anything non-spectacular or non-proprietary stays public. Anything
>sensitive requires authorization to view. Sometimes the whole site is
>restructured or renamed daily to destroy bookmarks. Sometimes graphics are
>stamped with an identifying mark in the signature info. Paranoia is to
>information as the sky is to the earth.
>
>"Life sucks. Get a f-ing helmet." -- Dennis Leary
>
Ed Gregory
http://www.members.home.net/edgregory/search1.htm


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=