On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 05:19:06 +0000, Roy Schestowitz put finger to
keyboard and typed:
>__/ [ Tony ] on Wednesday 22 February 2006 21:30 \__
>
>> Gemma Davies wrote:
>>> Los Angeles: United States Internet giant Google infringed copyright rules
>>> by posting thumbnail-size photos from other websites on its search-results
>>> pages, a US judge said in a ruling issued yesterday.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>http://www.odt.co.nz/article.php?refid=2006,02,23,11,01102,daf89a33152e6a6626467ebecb9aba1b§=3
>>>
>>
>>
>> Dead link. Try http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=88136
>
>I think some questions to ask are:
>
>* Did Perfect 10 know what robots.txt actually is?
>
>* Did they use it?
>
>* Did they permit crawling?
>
>* Did they understand the consequences?
>
>* Did they not enjoy seeing a rise in traffic to their site?
As far as the law is concerned, none of these would seem to be
relevent. Particularly the first two - the fact that someone can
easily do something about a perceived problem themselves, but chooses
not to, doesn't affect their ability to sue a third party for failing
to do something abut it. I don't know about the US, but there's a
precedent for this in the UK - look up the case of Godfrey v Demon if
you feeel so inclined.
Mark
--
Visit: http://www.ukcommunityradio.info - Community Radio in the UK
Listen: http://www.goodge.go.uk/files/dweeb.mp3 - you'll love it!
|
|
