www.AirDisaster.com is a great site for connections to information about Aviation Safety world wide and the latest news on Aviation mishaps, if you can stand the high density of pop up ads. I love the smilies of their Discussion Forums. You will find me there using the handle of GROUND HOG WASH.
Today my UPS died (replacement installed Fri the 12th), so I have been reduced to using a mere surge protector.
As you can see, I have discovered (been shown) how to work several kinds of links since my earlier Manila Radio learning.
Search Day offers this connection to some weblogs we might want to check out.
Top 30 UK weblogs, using info from Alexa search engine data base to find which are the most popular among millions of Internet users. Gblogs supplied the larger list of 529 UK based Weblogs sampled, to get the most popular in Britain. I had read someplace that there are many thousands of weblogs world wide, so this may be a sampling of some good sites within a larger spectrum.
A hot topic in the latest editions of Search Day are the implications of a court in Denmark ruling that Deep Linking is Illegal. More on this topic on my 2002-07-16 Tuesday posts.
Jan Karlsbjerg in his July 13 blog says this is not as big a deal as it seemed to be to me from the US press, in my comments below. In his Monday July 8 blog, he explains that the ruling is more about copyright than deep linking, that basically the court said that Newsbooster may not systematically deep link into other web sites' content when they do not want competitors to be doing that, not that deep linking is prohibited outside of this case. Thanks Jan.
The story in the press does seem to be much more ominous than as clarified by Jan.
What does this mean? Well the first thing is that if you have been doing business with anyone in Denmark, if you have any urls connected to Denmark, get legal clarification immediately. It may be that the rest of the world will have to stop doing business with Denmark until their courts overturn or clarify the ruling.
The July 9 edition of Search Day, by Chris Sherman, lets us know about this Denmark court ruling and speculates about some of the wider implications.
The July 10 issue has an article by Eric Ward on recent lawsuits over various sites linking to each other, and what the implications of the Denmark court ruling are for Search Engines, Stock Quotes, News Headlines. Eric Ward has been consulting for 8 years on linking and would be thrilled to testify in court how all this legal stuff is unnecessary, with some very narrow exceptions.
Links from Search Day to other useful information on this topic include:
Jan's blog clarifies the issues that led to the ruling in Denmark. There are some similar cases in the USA. It is one thing to link, like we do with blogging, to say here is something we found that is interesting, in which it is clear which content is ours and which is at the place we linked to. We bloggers want to carefully give credit to our sources, in a journalistic tradition. But in the news business, publishers want to steal customers from each other, by any method the law will let them get away with.
If there is a portal to news information and it is presented as if it is being delivered by an organization other than the one actually giving the news, that is unethical, and it is a topic of these legal cases.
If there are advertisements on a site, it is Ok if they are approved by the site, it is Ok if they are complimentary to the site's purposes and audience, or if totally unrelated. Subject of law suits is when the ads are trying to get people on a web site to go to a competitor of the web site.
Something else Jan alluded to that came up in the court case.
- Software is marketed that it is to perform function X.
- Software is purchased for the purpose of function X.
- The enterprise using the software states that it is doing function X.
- But really it is doing function Y.
- Who is liable for this misrepresentation?
- The enterprise for not knowing what is being done by the software they installed?
- The software provider for misrepresenting what their product does?
12:22:37 PM 
|
