 | | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
(...) Less shamelessly now, btw -- the page maintainer has made a more obvious credit to Q'R'U, and I'm okay with that if he is. (See: (URL)). (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
(...) Assuming they didn't ask your permission first, I'd say grabbing your quotes is kinda rude. Except for the existence of your uncopyright page, which pretty much allows anyone to do what they want. But still, professional sites should have (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
Dan: (...) If they make the pages with links to the rest of the site, then that shouldn't be the least bit difficult. And I can't see how a "cover page" can generate more revenue than a page inside the site. (...) If you use Pause DB images alone, (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
(...) while true - at least then they get to generate revenue, or attract to the rest of the site. If you use pause DB pics in your ebay auction (for instance), you are abuseing the fact that the pics are up there. (...) people should read what you (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: so-called "deep-linking" ruled okay
|
|
Dan: (...) The HTML construct with the FRAMESET and FRAME elements is a serious mistake that Netscape forced unto W3C even though it doesn't fit with the design of the web. (...) I don't feel the least bit bad about using peoples bandwidth, and I (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
