> Important digression: Linda did not really answer the question about the
code in
> the email, only the website. I'd be interesting in hearing from her on
that,
> too. Now, as I go to check to see whether the website is working, it
turns out
> that Linda has done something to prevent the images from showing up in my
> browser, although I can still see them by going through her web front
door.
> Perhaps she is looking at the "referring page" field and deciding not to
send
> her images to you if her own page is not making the request. I ask you
all,
> shouldn't she be relying on courts or cops or her congressman to prevent
others
> from using her images, instead of using the instruction manual for her web
> server?
The law cannot "prevent" other from viewing the pages, but it DOES create a cause of action for improper copying. But Linda is free to use technology to further enhance her rights. This is not an either/or issue. One can do BOTH to protect one's creative works, but there is no OBLIGATION, under the law, for her to block others from improper use.
> I hope she didn't learn about this technology here, on this CNI list!
> If so, we should all be ashamed.
>
> So now I ask him directly:
>
> Dear Bodi,
>
> Is the HTML code below an infringement of Linda's copyright?
If you copied is from her site, and the code is not purely functional (i.e., it has some creative elements), then yes, it could be considered an infringement.
> Assume that
> if I photographed my computer screen while MS Internet Explorer was
> interpreting this code, it would be an infringement of her copyright.
Perhaps.
> Assume that, if you go to the website below you see (as you would have
> seen a few weeks ago) images created by Linda. (I have included a
> "<!--" at the beginning to try to prevent mail readers from interpreting
> this as HTML.) If so, who is or who are the infringers?
Assuming that the site was put in place by an authorized copyright holder, then nobody infringes by entering the URL in a browser and viewing the site on that browser. There is (or should be) an implied license to view that site, because it was made publicly available. But there is no right to use the code for any other purpose than viewing it with the browser.
>
> Is the website http://www.amherstrugby.org/myart.html an infringement of
your
> copyright?
An infringement of "my" copyright? no. I don't own any copyright in the image.
> If so, who is or who are the infringers? What if the page had a
> shopping cart and I was selling crystals?
This statement makes no sense. How can I say who the infringers are, if I don't know who, if anybody, owns the copyright in the image?
But if one assumes that the image is a violation of somebody's copyright, it is likely that any viewer technically infringes the copyright by nature of a copy on their computer. However, it is UNLIKELY that such a person would be sued (there is no real likelihood of damages by the use).
-Bodi Received on Thu Aug 21 2003 - 22:00:29 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:49 GMT