[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
URL linking suit: "Lawsuit Threatens Future of the Web"
H
> March 3, 1997
>
> Lawsuit Threatens Future
> of the Web
>
> By John C. Dvorak
>
> The greatest threat to the World Wide Web
> appeared last week as CNN, Dow-Jones, Time,
> Times-Mirror, Washington Post, and Reuters
> sued Total News in an attempt to prevent Total
> News from linking to their sites. The
> stupidity and danger of such a suit seems
> beyond the comprehension of these media
> companies--that is, unless they know exactly
> what they are doing and are out to destroy the
> Web from within. In fact, that is the only
> logical explanation I can think of for this
> lawsuit.
>
> At first I was convinced that this group is
> simply naive as to the workings of the Web.
> Linking is a part of the Web. It is the Web.
> The executives who filed suit claim that Total
> News is "republishing" when in fact it is
> merely linking. So the suit is based on a lie
> or deception. It's obvious that these six
> large media companies, which should have some
> clue as to the functioning of the Web, either
> do not understand it at all or are hatching a
> sinister plot to kill the Web. If this case
> goes to a judge who cannot understand the Web,
> then all linking could be challenged. The Web
> dies. The old media continue to print on
> paper.
>
> Total News -- A Good Site
> I've checked Total News, and it has the best,
> most organized links to newspapers around the
> world that I have yet seen. Total News is a
> classic new-wave metasite. In its frames are
> meta-advertisements, which may surround the
> linked site. This is a trend that is going to
> continue. To me this is no different than a
> newsstand that sports a poster promoting
> Macy's and sells newspapers and magazines,
> too. In fact, when you link to CNN, for
> example, you get a CNN advertisement in the
> frame; the CNN ad banners are served as usual.
> Exactly how that "damages" CNN is a mystery to
> me. If there were 100 sites like Total News,
> among them taking, say, 100,000 additional
> users to a site, exactly how does that hurt
> any publisher? It doesn't. In fact, the linked
> sites should be paying Total News a
> commission. Total News is actually increasing
> their business. I mean, how dumb are these
> people? Not that dumb. Something else is
> afoot. You don't sue someone for increasing
> your business.
>
> Use a Browser, Go to Jail
> We all know that Total News is not
> republishing anything. It's the Time server
> sending the Time content to my computer, not
> Total News. Total News is just giving me a
> link to click on. If publishers with Web-savvy
> personnel, such as the Washington Post,
> pretend that they do not understand this, then
> how will a judge? When this suit goes forward,
> then AltaVista, Excite!, Yahoo!, and all the
> search engines that provide links could be
> instantly out of business. You want to find
> something? Forget it. Anyone who says Time is
> their favorite link and puts a URL of the Time
> site on his personal page could be sued for
> copyright violation, too. The frame issue will
> be lost in the shuffle. And what's the
> difference between framed and nonframed
> browsing? If these sites want to reject links
> from Total News, that can be done
> programmatically with a number of
> technologies. Obviously, that's not what they
> are after.
>
> Something Is Wrong
> Furthermore, if these six publishers don't
> want to be linked, they can close their
> connectivity with a password. But their
> behavior is like a publisher dropping leaflets
> from an airplane, then complaining when people
> pick them up and read them. The whole thing
> doesn't make a lot of sense. Something is
> fishy.
>
> This threat to the nature of the Web is not to
> be taken lightly. Pressure must be put on the
> Gang of Six to back off immediately.
>
> Take Action
> It's important that we do something, including
> considering a boycott against these
> publishers, as well as a letter-and-fax
> campaign. Also, contact your legislative
> representatives (by letter or fax) and let
> them know how you feel. Otherwise, forget
> linking and forget the Web. This is not
> trivial. These publishers are big and smart.
> This isn't a case of them being plain stupid
> and naive, even though it's been made to look
> that way. These are no lightweights. They are
> worried sick that the Web will fundamentally
> change the nature of their business, and they
> want to put a stop to it. This is their first
> attempt to protect themselves and their future
> as "old" media. It won't be their last
> attempt, either.
>
http://www.pcmag.com/insites/dvorak/jd.htm