RE: Deep Linkage

The legality (And morality, in my opinion) is that ANYTHING posted to the internet is public domain as far as linking goes.
I am in total agreement here, BBQ, once it's posted to the WWW (Legally declared a public place) it's fair game to use for a link.
Being as I work for a company for which this is an issue (My company aggregates data, that is to say we search multiple other sites and show the customers all the data we collect), this topic has been tossed around here alot.
Regards,
spectre

Comment on RE: Deep Linkage

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE: RE: Deep Linkage by BBQ (Curate) on Jul 21, 2000 at 05:11 UTC
Well put spectre. I guess the point I was trying to make was more on the self-image (or too much of it) than the legal aspects of deep linking some monk's image. But yes, I guess that was part of what came up in the discussion in the chatter-box. Therefor, not only should people take the usage of their image more lightly, but they should respect the way the internet works! I can see this topic branching in several different directions, à la a good OLD Slashdot thread: warez vs. free software, Napster and MP3's, comercial deep linkage without credit, and even more personal aspects of what happened to me... I mean, I could be highly offended by being associated with "Distorted Youth" (WTF do those guys do anyway???) but I'm not! I found it amusing. Even if they HAD, let say, altered my image, or refered to my pic as being an example of how ugly one can be, I still wouldn't be offended. I have come to learn that its better to laugh with people, than laugh at people. Even when you're the one being made fun of. Life's too short to get all pissed and prissy with small issues like these. #!/home/bbq/bin/perl # Trust no1!	[reply]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.