|
|
Posted by Jose on 03/20/06 20:16
> On a technicality... Using frames, and other means, I can instruct your
> browser to load someone else's page into a section of one of my pages. My
> site however, has not displayed any information from the third party's
> site. Your browser, providing it can and does follow frameset
> instructions, did the retrieving and displaying. I only provided a link to
> the third party's page and instructions on where to display the content.
On a similar technicality, when I copy my friend's MP3, the computer is
merely following my instructions also. I am not doing the copying, I am
merely telling the operating system where the data is and giving it
standard file instructions; the operating system does the retrieving,
processing, and storing.
Frames are another instance in which the idea of copyright is being
stretched. To address the fundamental question of right or wrong one
must look beyong technicalities.
=Should= it be considered wrong (and thus made illegal) to appropriate
somebody else's content in such a way as to represent it as yours via
frames (or other means), even if no copying is involved? This is
similar to the question of whether =actually= copying intellectual
property should be considered wrong (and thus illegal) even though
(unlike chattel) the original remains with the owner.
Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|