Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
On 12/13/98 someone said this:
<<Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 21:19:53 -0800
From: "Bryan Caldwell" <bcaldwell@softcom.net>
Subject: Re: [Leica] Legal links
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- - ------=_NextPart_000_003F_01BE26DE.53793480
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tina,
You have my sympathies, but I don't think there's a lot you can do. A =
website such as yours is open to all comers and a link is merely one =
person's recommendation that others take a look at your site. Since =
they're not using your images in their site they're not infringing on =
your copyrights. If you put your images on a site that is open to all, =
you can't really question why people choose to visit it and view your =
pictures - as distasteful as their reasons might be.
BTW, I am an attorney but this is not an area I have any practical =
experience in. Internet law is still in its infancy and is filled with =
grey areas. I think a good analogy would be that if you published your =
pictures in a book - protected by copyright - you really couldn't stop =
anyone else from recommending that others buy your book, even if it was
=
for reasons you didn't agree with. Or, if someone made a movie that they
=
thought was good but was really horribly bad, they probably couldn't =
stop a link from a site that promised "bad" movies. (Not in any way to =
suggest that your photographs - which I looked at before writing this =
and like a great deal - have anything qualitatively in common with bad =
movies).
When owners of websites start to say that it's okay for people to visit
=
their site for some reasons but not for others, the web ceases to be an
=
open environment.
You could, of course, post some disclaimer or cautionary message on your
=
site.=20
Bryan=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Tina Manley <images@InfoAve.Net>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us =
<leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Sunday, December 13, 1998 8:54 PM
Subject: [Leica] Legal links
=20
=20
Dear LUGnuts:
=20
I have already posted this question on PhotoPro and they are =
debating it furiously. I would love to have your opinion also. What =
can or should I do?
=20
Someone alerted me that my web site was linked to something called =
Boylinks at:
=20
http://www.fpc.net/boylinks/picture.html=20
=20
I sent them an e-mail and asked them to remove the link. They sent =
the following reply:
=20
Dear Tina Manley,
Boylinks provides links to sites that are already in the public =
domain and=20
provide information (including images) of boys. For this reason your
=
site=20
qualified for inclusion.
I must point out that while your site remains in the public domain I
=
am=20
unable to consider removing this link.
yours sincerely,
Blinker
=20
=20
While my photographs on the site are copyrighted, the entire website
=
is not. What are my rights? Can they do this?
=20
Thanks -
=20
Tina
=20
PhotoPro seems about evenly divided between "free speech"(they can =
say whatever they want) and "libel"(they can't say anything about you =
that you don't want them to). Since the site doesn't actually copy my =
photos or the web site but only points to it, it isn't really a =
copyright issue; however, I don't want my site linked to "Boylinks"! =
What should I do?
=20
Thanks for your help -
=20
Tina
=20
=20
=20
Tina Manley, ASMP
=20
=20
http://www.photogs.com/manley/index.html
http://members.tripod.com/~Tina_Manley/index.html=20
- - ------=_NextPart_000_003F_01BE26DE.53793480
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.3510.1400"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Tina,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>You have my sympathies, but I don't think there's a
=
lot you=20
can do. A website such as yours is open to all comers and a link is =
merely one=20
person's recommendation that others take a look at your site. Since =
they're not=20
using your images in their site they're not infringing on your =
copyrights. If=20
you put your images on a site that is open to all, you can't really =
question why=20
people choose to visit it and view your pictures - as distasteful as =
their=20
reasons might be.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>BTW, I am an attorney but this is not an area I have
=
any=20
practical experience in. Internet law is still in its infancy and is =
filled with=20
grey areas. I think a good analogy would be that if you published your =
pictures=20
in a book - protected by copyright - you really couldn't stop anyone =
else from=20
recommending that others buy your book, even if it was for reasons you =
didn't=20
agree with. Or, if someone made a movie that they thought was good but =
was=20
really horribly bad, they probably couldn't stop a link from a site that
=
promised "bad" movies. (Not in any way to suggest that your=20
photographs - which I looked at before writing this and like a great =
deal - have=20
anything qualitatively in common with bad movies).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>When owners of websites start to say that it's okay
=
for people=20
to visit their site for some reasons but not for others, the web ceases
=
to be an=20
open environment.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>You could, of course, post some disclaimer or =
cautionary=20
message on your site. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Bryan </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT:
=
5px">
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><B>-----Original =
Message-----</B><BR><B>From:=20
</B>Tina Manley <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:images@InfoAve.Net">images@InfoAve.Net</A>><BR><B>To:
=
</B><A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us">leica-users@mejac.palo-=
alto.ca.us</A>=20
<<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us">leica-users@mejac.palo-=
alto.ca.us</A>><BR><B>Date:=20
</B>Sunday, December 13, 1998 8:54 PM<BR><B>Subject: </B>[Leica] =
Legal=20
links<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>Dear LUGnuts:<BR><BR>I have already posted
=
this=20
question on PhotoPro and they are debating it furiously. I =
would love=20
to have your opinion also. What can or should I =
do?<BR><BR>Someone=20
alerted me that my web site was linked to something called
Boylinks=20
at:<BR><BR><FONT color=3D#0000ff><U><A=20
href=3D"http://www.fpc.net/boylinks/picture.html" eudora =3D=20
autourl>http://www.fpc.net/boylinks/picture.html</A></FONT></U> =
<BR><BR>I=20
sent them an e-mail and asked them to remove the link. They sent the
=
following reply:<BR><BR>Dear Tina Manley,<BR>Boylinks provides links
=
to=20
sites that are already in the public domain and <BR>provide =
information=20
(including images) of boys. For this reason your site <BR>qualified
=
for=20
inclusion.<BR>I must point out that while your site remains in the =
public=20
domain I am <BR>unable to consider removing this link.<BR>yours=20
sincerely,<BR>Blinker<BR><BR><BR>While my photographs on the site =
are=20
copyrighted, the entire website is not. What are my rights? Can they
=
do=20
this?<BR><BR>Thanks -<BR><BR>Tina<BR><BR>PhotoPro seems about evenly
=
divided=20
between "free speech"(they can say whatever they want) and
=
"libel"(they can't say anything about you that you don't =
want them=20
to). Since the site doesn't actually copy my photos or the web
=
site=20
but only points to it, it isn't really a copyright issue; however, I
=
don't=20
want my site linked to "Boylinks"! What should I=20
do?<BR><BR>Thanks for your help -<BR><BR>Tina<BR><BR><BR>
<DIV>Tina Manley, ASMP</DIV><BR>
<DIV><A href=3D"http://www.photogs.com/manley/index.html" EUDORA =3D
=
AUTOURL>http://www.photogs.com/manley/index.html</A></DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://members.tripod.com/~Tina_Manley/index.html" EUDORA =
=3D=20
AUTOURL>http://members.tripod.com/~Tina_Manley/index.html</A>=20
</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
- - ------=_NextPart_000_003F_01BE26DE.53793480-->>
*Fer one; it is a miserable waste of band width to clip the ENTIRE
message and repost it in response (as demonstrated here.)
*Fer two; whatever you're using for mail is posting TWO versions of
the same thing when you do. It's that nuisance "MIME" thing. FIX IT,
please, before you post again.
*Fer three; if the subject is being debated so hotly on PhotoPro, why
bring it over here? Perhaps to increase your traffic (hence the MANY
click thrus prominently displayed within your messages?) [Curious,
there are almost as many click thrus in the Manley messages as there are
in the 24 ASPH FS messages!]
*Fer four; since it contained NO Leica information it is considered
proper to note same in the Subj: area (as you can see from my effort
above.) People can then SKIP the meaningless drivel for the more
important meat of the NG.
If being 'maligned' with a site you find objectionable is so terrible,
change your URL or drop it all together. Or, on the other hand, maybe
you could remove the material they find so provocative? Have you paused
to consider you might be promulgating the 'problem' after all?
I apologize to everyone for compounding the issue by this netiquite
demonstration, but maybe we can ALL learn from it??