Can I Link To Coyrighted Images.

[mogadishu]

But technically, crumbcat's posts are just as illegal as what i wanted to post?

[Lamsey]

Originally posted by mogadishu@3 August 2003 - 00:27
But technically, crumbcat's posts are just as illegal as what i wanted to post?

Technically, i suppose so

[3rd gen noob]

yet again...the rules leave members and mods at loggerheads

[Lamsey]

The rules are there to avoid the possibility of the board getting into trouble.

DC Comics might take issue with DDL-links to one of their commercial works, but I don't really imagine anyone complaining about CD covers...

[Adster]

yeah I thought the RIAA f*cked up a few cover sites couldn't they do the same if we psot album covers??

[balamm]

Inline linking to images is not illegal under current US law. This would take care of the problem of posting album covers from American artists at least.

What is Inline Linking?



This is an example of inline linking. The image below is an image that is available on the United States Copyright Office Web Site. It appears as if I have copied the image to my server, but in reality I have not copied the image at all. The below image is called up directly from the US Copyright Office server and displayed in the location of my choosing on this web page.

In Kelly v. Arriba, 280 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2002), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that this type of linking violates the copyright owner's right to display, which is one of the rights a copyright bestows upon the holder. See 17 USC 106.

The latest in the Kelly v. Arriba linking battle occurred on July 7, 2003, when the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit withdrew its earlier opinion in Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp (February 6, 2002). The Court filed this substitute decision holding that Arriba’s reproduction of Kelly’s images for use as thumbnails in Arriba’s search engine is a fair use under the Copyright Act. However, the Court held that the district court should not have reached whether Arriba’s display of Kelly’s full-sized images is a fair use because the parties never moved for summary judgment on this claim and Arriba never conceded the prima facie case as to the full-size images. The district court’s opinion is, therefore, affirmed as to the thumbnails and reversed as to the display of the full-sized images. The Ninth Circuit remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs and fees on appeal. The petition for rehearing en banc is now mooted. This is rather significant because the earlier decision of the Ninth Circuit called into question inline linking, and declared that such linking was a copyright infringement. The original opinion was criticized because when one engages in inline linking there is no copy being made by the alleged infringer. Rather, the object inline linked is pulled directly from the host server with no intermediate copy being made by the accused infringer. For more information on this development see Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp (9th Cir. July 7, 2003) and Court backs thumbnail image linking (CNET).

In any event, whatever the law may become, Section 105 of the Copyright Act, states that no work that is created by the Federal Government is copyrightable, therefore, the inline link below could not violate the right to display, because there is no right to display, because there is no copyright in the first place. Had the link below been to a copyrightable image, the display right would be violated under the now withdrawn Ninth Circuit Kelly v. Arriba decision of February 6, 2002. Given that the case has been remanded for trial, the fate of inline linking remains in question.

If you are confused by the above explanation, I suggest that you put your cursor over the image below, right click, go down to properties, and then notice the URL is not to IPWatchdog.com, but rather is to Copyright.gov. If you are still confused, go to the IPWatchdog.com image at the top of this page, right click, go down to properties, and then notice the URL is in fact to an IPWatchdog.com file.



http://www.ipwatchdog.com/inline_linking.html

[Adster]

ok thanks balamm that explains it all I didn't know that

[J'Pol]

There was an interesting discussion with regard to this and your IE cache, which does in fact make a copy.

Basically it was decided, as I recall, that the www would be unworkable without this system in place.

That could all be nonsense tho'

[vivitron 15]

Originally posted by balamm
when one engages in inline linking there is no copy being made by the alleged infringer. Rather, the object inline linked is pulled directly from the host server with no intermediate copy being made

ok, so what if i direct link to an app which is stored on an external server...this way, im not copying it, rather the file is pulled directly from the host server with no intermediate copy being made. this way, Im not doing anything copyright, Im just telling you where there is somethig copyright............

in fact, surely an mp3 is a computer "image" of a music track, since it is not actually music which comes thru my phone line?



and yes, im playing devils advocate

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by vivitron 15+3 August 2003 - 22:31--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vivitron 15 @ 3 August 2003 - 22:31)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-balamm
when one engages in inline linking there is no copy being made by the alleged infringer. Rather, the object inline linked is pulled directly from the host server with no intermediate copy being made

ok, so what if i direct link to an app which is stored on an external server...this way, im not copying it, rather the file is pulled directly from the host server with no intermediate copy being made. this way, Im not doing anything copyright, Im just telling you where there is somethig copyright............

in fact, surely an mp3 is a computer "image" of a music track, since it is not actually music which comes thru my phone line?



and yes, im playing devils advocate [/b][/quote]
It&#39;s not an image it&#39;s a compressed version.

A jpg is a compressed version of a bmp, it&#39;s still a copy.