Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Danish web publishers challenging deep linking in courts
Nando Times ^ | Anick Jesdanun

Posted on 06/10/2002 6:41:33 PM PDT by mhking


Danish publishers challenge linking to Web sites
By ANICK JESDANUN, AP Internet Writer

(June 10, 2002 12:32 p.m. EDT) - Nicolai Lassen considers linking such a fundamental element of the World Wide Web that he sees nothing wrong with creating a service around linking to news articles at more than 3,000 other Web sites.

Danish publishers, however, equate such linking with stealing - and have gone to court to stop it.

The case, scheduled for hearings in Copenhagen later this month, is among the latest to challenge the Web's basic premise of encouraging the free flow of information through linking.

Requiring permission before linking could jeopardize online journals, search engines and other sites that link - which is to say, just about every site on the Internet.

If the Web's creators hadn't wanted linking, "they would have called it the World Wide Straight Line," said Avi Adelman, a Web site operator involved in a dispute over linking to The Dallas Morning News.

Most of the court cases and legal threats have been over a form of hypertext-connecting called deep-linking, by which you simply connect users to a specific page rather than a site's home page.

Such disputes reflect "a frustration certain people have with a loss of control" once they post something, said Michael Geist, law professor at the University of Ottawa.

Lassen's Newsbooster service tries to make news stories easier to find by presenting links to items with keywords of a user's choosing. It's much like a search engine, except Newsbooster charges a subscription fee and lets users choose to automatically receive links by e-mail.

"From the home page down to the actual story you want to read can be a very, very long way," said Lassen, Newsbooster's editor-in-chief. "By using a technology such as Newsbooster, you save a lot of time."

The Danish Newspaper Publishers' Association believes Newsbooster should either shut down or negotiate payments.

"We consider it unfair to base your business upon the works of others," said Ebbe Dal, the group's managing director.

Not that opponents of deep-linking always object to it.

Dal thinks its OK for a newspaper to offer a deep link or two accompanying an article, or for search engines to help users navigate.

Belo Corp. likewise prohibits deep-linking to its sites, including the Morning News. But one of its newspapers, the Providence Journal, maintains an online journal that deep links to other sites.

Belo spokesman Scott Baradell was quoted by several news organizations as saying the company isn't against all deep-linking. But he would not offer specifics on why it objects to deep links to Morning News articles on Adelman's non-subscription site, which covers local Dallas affairs. Contacted by The Associated Press, Baradell said he would have no additional comment.

Reasons for opposing linking vary.

In a federal lawsuit, Homestore.com Inc. complains that Bargain Network, by deep linking to Homestore's real estate listings, interferes with its opportunities to sell advertising.

Others, like the Council of Better Business Bureaus, worry that a link - deep or otherwise - can imply endorsement, even if it reaches nothing more than a page with tips. The organization has persuaded thousands of sites to remove links to its Web pages, citing trademark claims.

But to Web purists, a link is no more than a footnote or a page reference. To ban deep-linking, they say, is to prohibit newspaper readers from going straight to the sports pages because they might miss advertising in the front section.

Beside, linking is a way for sites to boost traffic.

"Historically at least, there has been a tradition that if you put something up on the World Wide Web, it would be a public resource," said Matt Cutts, a software engineer at Google. He said Google removes links when asked, though few sites request it as most want to be found.

Early U.S. court decisions have sided with deep-linking. Exceptions are in cases of framing, where a site tries to make information from other sites appear as its own, and ones involving links to tools that circumvent anti-piracy measures built into commercial software.

"It was one of those issues that people thought was more or less settled," said Jorge Contreras, vice chairman of the Internet Law Group at Hale and Dorr firm. "For whatever reason, these last couple of months, a spate of new disputes have come up."

If they are resolved in favor of plaintiffs opposed to deep-linking, legal experts say that could encourage more lawsuits and more moats going up around certain Web sites.

Several sites, including the Belo papers, Overnite Transportation Co., ACNielsen research firm and KPMG International, ban all or some deep-linking. The International Trademark Association and The Washington Post reserve the right to prohibit it on a case-by-case basis.

The Albuquerque Journal and American City Business Journals have attempted to charge for the right to deep link. Although editors acknowledge they won't take action against casual deep-linkers, they say a handful have been willing to pay - $50 in Albuquerque's case.

"There are some companies that would rather pay to get a piece of paper and get that blessing," said Donn Friedman, the Albuquerque paper's assistant managing editor for technology.

Technology exists for sites that truly want to block deep-linking.

For example, the news site for The Associated Press, The WIRE, checks what site a user comes from. If it isn't a site authorized to use deep links, the user is automatically directed to a default page and required to enter through one of the AP's member newspapers or broadcasters.

Other sites can require registration or paid subscriptions.

Though Web site operators don't always like technical blocks, they prefer that to a legal environment where a ban is presumed and permission must be sought each time.

Weldon Johnson of LetsRun.com, involved in a dispute this spring with Runner's World magazine, said that as long as sites keep the doors open, "it's totally wrong for them to say you have to link to certain pages."


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Technical
KEYWORDS: advertising; deeplinking; lawsuits; www

1 posted on 06/10/2002 6:41:33 PM PDT by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: all


What? You haven't contributed to Free Republic yet?

Did you know Free Republic is funded solely by us?

Don't wait until it too late! Do your part, contribute if you can,

or bump the fundraising thread.

A Tribute to Freepers - Summer Freepathon! Thread 2

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
Send PayPal direct to JimRob@psnw.com

2 posted on 06/10/2002 6:43:39 PM PDT by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: mhking
If there is a newspaper on the table at McDonald's, and I fold it to present an article on page 5 for my friend to read am I stealing the article? Am I allowed only to point my friend to the front page so he can conduct a search for the article in question himself? Am I gagged by the courts to prevent me from saying where to look?
4 posted on 06/10/2002 7:21:19 PM PDT by Arkinsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dark Nerd
"Oooooooh, a Danish court! I am shaking in my boots. Uh-huh. Yep. Sure am! Honest! "

Go ahead and laugh.

When they cut off your supply of Little Mermaid Butter Cookies that will wipe the smile from your face.

Screw with the Danes at your own risk.

5 posted on 06/10/2002 8:32:03 PM PDT by billorites
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dark Nerd
Yeah, what HE said.
6 posted on 06/10/2002 9:48:06 PM PDT by Still Using Air
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Arkinsaw
Well said, and sadly that is what they are saying.
7 posted on 06/10/2002 11:43:21 PM PDT by JSteff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mhking
Services like this are being unethical, since they are making their money off of others' content. However, the answer isn't litigation, but technology.

The article stated an extremely simple answer: check the referrer. But that's stupid, as you're keeping people from seeing your content, or making it those dreaded several more clicks to get there (always a high risk of losing the person). The easiest, most intelligent way is simply to combine your text with your advertising just as is done in regular newspapers.

These idiot dinosaurs are getting free traffic referrals, and all they're doing is complaining and blocking. They should be taking advantage of the situation to get more ad impressions.

8 posted on 06/11/2002 1:22:53 AM PDT by Quila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson