[LINK] permission required to link?
Wed, 27 Mar 2002 16:11:08 +1100
Roger Clarke wrote:
> 3. linking. That's what the question was about, and what my answer was
> about. And we have a disagreement on this point.
> You said "I don't think you can give blanket approval for a link to a
> My claim is that the concept 'approve' and the concept 'link' have
> nothing to do with one another. None of us have any ability to
> approve or disapprove of a link to a page in whose content we own
> copyright. It simply isn't a right that the law gives us.
> From a policy viewpoint, I'm arguing that we should never, ever *have*
> such a right, because it would be a seriously dangerous expansion of
> the notion of copyright, and greatly against the public interest.
> (It would, however, advantage large publishing corporations).
A linker on LINK has observed that a link is like a citation. (confused?)
A hypertext link is not exactly like a traditional citation as found in a
written hardcopy work.
I refer the reader to  for an example of this idiocy.
 Sen. Ballsup, et. al. "Why Aussies need censorship", 1995
on the web:
I refer the reader to __this__example__of__idiocy__.
In the latter case, the link text (enclosed in __) and the link itself
are two separate things. What is linked to in this case is not obvious
until one clicks on the link. The reader will immediately associate
"this example of idiocy" with the linked web page, which has a much
stronger effect and more immediate effect than a citation.
Also, the context of the page / website in which the link is found can
(possibly) profoundly affect the public image of the target web site/page,
due simply to the ubiquity of the web.
Could this be part of the reason some copyright owners are reluctant
to grant link permission?
My answer to this issue: use another medium if you do not wish your
web page to be linked to. The World Wide *Web* might be inappropriate
for your purposes.
Rick Welykochy || Praxis Services Pty Limited
ultracrepidarian: (n., adj.) a person who gives opinions beyond his scope of knowledge.