Hmmm.. How about this... The photographer who take a photo has the
copyright over the photo not the owner of the picture motive, you, me
or any other photo object. So caching is nothing but taking a picture
using another sort of camera called robot :-) Nothing more really. If
a browser maker decides to show an HTML tag lets say <H1> in 300
pixels will that be a copyright or trademark violation then?

What one can do is to prevent one to be photographed or stop the
robots visit one's website :-)

On 3/30/06, Insurance Squared Inc. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW, I believe all of what's been stated is the case - and I'd also
> assume that since Google/MSN/Yahoo are all doing this that it's been
> tested and OK.
>
> However I know many people complain about the cache.  Some people see it
> as a copyright violation - technically correct or not, the cache does
> basically duplicate their site and make it available online.  And I've
> never seen how to argue against that other than 'legally it's not'.  IMO
> it's cutting it pretty close.
>
> The other issue some have with displaying cache is that it allows people
> to pull down websites without ever visiting the website in questions.
> If I put serious effort into blocking bots and scrapers for example, but
> let the SE's in so I can get indexed, then the bots and scrapers can
> completely bypass my efforts, visit the SE and pull down the cached
> pages there.  They can then do nasty stuff with my content, like copy it
> on their site for their own purposes.  Not good, and that's the reason
> why I don't show the cache on my SE.
>
> g.
>
>
> Dan Morrill wrote:
>
> >If I remember it correctly, google as been sued and won a number of times on
> >this issue, you can cache, you can search others web sites, grocklaw has the
> >data on this one, but I know you can search, you can cache under fair use,
> >and the idea of public access, as long as you are not cracking passwords,
> >and honor robots.txt and they post it on the web, it is considered public in
> >that regard.
> >
> >I am not a lawyer, check grocklaw.
> >
> >r/d
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: TDLN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 3:34 AM
> >To: [email protected]
> >Subject: Re: Legal issues
> >
> >Google's and Yahoo's Terms of Service provide interesting reading regarding
> >such legal issues.
> >
> >http://www.google.com/terms_of_service.html
> >http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >Rgrds, Thomas
> >
> >On 3/30/06, gekkokid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Shouldn't be a problem if your honouring the robots.txt
> >>
> >>Legal issues could be Stealing Copyrighted Material? thats if your
> >>reproducing it but if your analysing the content and links and keeping to
> >>the robots.txt rules I doubt your have a problem unless its crawling every
> >>10 minutes,
> >>
> >>wouldn't grabbing the RSS feed be better?
> >>
> >>would http://diggdot.us be a good example of what your trying to do? or
> >>have
> >>i got the wrong idea entirely?
> >>
> >>Any one else have any thoughts?
> >>
> >>_gk
> >>
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "Berlin Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>To: <[email protected]>
> >>Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 8:13 AM
> >>Subject: Legal issues
> >>
> >>
> >>What are say the legal issues of crawling a site like reddit, digg or
> >>slashdot.  Assuming that you are just collecting links that users post
> >>through that service and then you are regathering those links.  I
> >>can't see an issue there.
> >>
> >>The other extreme would be crawling google and requerying or something
> >>along those lines.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid0944&bid$1720&dat1642
_______________________________________________
Nutch-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nutch-general

Reply via email to