home page Ruminations of a Western Expatriate - journal grim amusements - weblog media relations - media commentary scriptorium - essays dear mr postmanners - humor links
old logo: Angel of death and Mr Happy Sun






                                                  your daily dose of corrosive cynicism!

 
« australia vs the internet | Main | snow job »

linking

Linking ... can be hazardous to your health. Financially, anyway.

FindLaw's Writ - Hilden: Should Linking Be Immune From Lawsuits?..... What are the theories under which linkers can be liable? Linkers should be wary when it comes to any area of law that allows for contributory, vicarious, or "aiding and abetting" liability; imposes liability on republishers or disseminators of information, as well as original publishers; or simply is vague about who the "publisher" is in the first place. And unfortunately, that describes many areas of law. For instance, in the libel context, the general rule is that "Republication of a libel does not diminish liability." That means that, for libel purposes, linking and posting are effectively very similar. The rule is counterintuitive - by comparison, most people feel that repeating gossip is less blameworthy than initiating it - but it is the law. [....] Congress has only acted to expand liability for linking. Through the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (as I discussed in a previous column), links can potentially trigger liability if they lead the user to computer code that allows copyright infringement. Meanwhile, all the other potential state-law and federal-law sources of liability for linking remain.

Posted by iain at December 10, 2002 06:19 PM

 

Comments
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments: