| |
On Sat, 18 Dec 1999 00:36:12 GMT, "James Brown"
<galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Matthew Miller writes:
> > James Brown <galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote:
> > > That's the same logic as "Anything in a store is for sale, that's what a
> > > store is FOR."
Anything in a store _is_ for sale. Anything that isn't for sale isn't
_in_ the store, it's _a part of_ the store.
That's the only way for the analogy of the web to a store even to
remotely work.
> Nope, it's not. It's a very close analogy to what Jasper posted:
> "Yes, it is. Anything on an unsecured webserver is being published."
> Which you refute much more logically below.
No he doesn't. He agrees with me in every regard.
>
> > Obviously, not everything on the web server itself is public. For example,
> > www.lego.com runs on Microsoft IIS on top of NT 4 -- obviously the system
IIS is not "on" the webserver in the sense I was using. It is software
that is stored on the hard disk in the physical web server, and
running on it. This has nothing, but utterly _nothing_ to do with the
_logical_ webserver.
"on the webserver" === documents to be made publicly available area.
> As a real-life example, there is a directory on <http:www.shades-of-night.com>
> that gets pictures and documents posted to it to make them available to friends
> of ours who can't (for whatever reason) receive them via e-mail. Are they
> "published"? No.
Yes. It's available via the webserver, in what is commonly known in
technical terms as "the public area".
Ask a judge.
> As another example, what if I receive an e-mail from company X, because I'm a
> loyal customer. It gives me a code that I can enter on their website that
> takes me to a "special offers" area where I can get a deal on product A. The
> information on the other side of that code could be linked directly by a URL,
> but it certainly isn't meant to be publically available.
If it can, it's a very poorly designed website. I think you'll find it
can't in most cases. And, quite frankly, posting the link to such
would not constitute a breach of copyright. Reproducing the code,
OTOH, would.
> Certainly it is the originators right to determine "intent to publish", not Joe
> Public.
Oh. So if I print a few hundred folders, crop-dust them over the inner
city, then say that everyone who's read it, or shown it to friends, or
given it away has violated my copyright because I didn't intend to
publish it, I have a leg to stand on?
Please.
>
> I could give other examples as well, and I'm not even remotely an expert.
Probably equally easily disproved.
Jasper
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
93 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
