Author Puts Article Online, Insists That Due To Copyright, You Cannot Link To It

from the that'll-work dept

BeeAitch points us to yet another misunderstanding of copyright law, though this one is more amusing than anything else. It comes from an article from 2005 written by one Dr. T. Matthew Ciolek, from Australian National University, and it's apparently about "trade routes." Honestly, it doesn't matter what the article is about. What matters is that at the very top, it says:
Note: due to copyright restrictions this page may not be linked from other online pages.
Then, at the very bottom, it says:
Copyright (c) 2005 by Encyclopedia of Globalization. Grolier Academic. All rights reserved. This page may not be linked from other online pages.
And, in neither case is that accurate. You absolutely can link to it as I have just now (and above) and (what the hell) will do again (just for fun). Sorry Dr. T. Matthew Ciolek, that's just not how copyright works. You are free to block anyone who comes via referrals from other sites (or block referrals from this site specifically). You're also free not to post your content online, or to bar others from republishing it (recognizing certain legal exemptions). But, nothing in copyright law says that you can order people not to link to your work.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2011 @ 10:33pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    When someone makes a bibliography or a works cited, is that an IP violation? I think not. Then again, perhaps it's not because it's considered fair use, and come to think of it, you could make that argument. I think there is a legal difference between using someone's GPL code and simply linking to or citing someone's work. I guess that kinda does fall under fair use, but that doesn't necessarily mean Mike is wrong, since he mostly just said that linking is OK.

    Here is more on linking.

    "the court in Ticketmaster v. Tickets.com found that links were not infringements of copyrigh"

    http://www.chillingeffects.org/linking/faq.cgi

    So, if I intentionally linked to infringing material to induce infringement, then I can get in trouble. but if you, the copy privilege holder, willingly put a website up and I linked to it, then I'm good. Every situation is different and to lump code with hyperlinks is a bit disingenuous.

    and if you still think you're right

    "On about Aug 03, 2010, BusyBox won triple damages of $90,000 and lawyers' costs and fees of $47,865, and possession of "presumably a lot of high-def TVs" as infringing equipment in the lawsuit Software Freedom Conservancy v. Best Buy, etal., the GPL infringement case noted in the paragraph above.[29]"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BusyBox#GPL_lawsuits

    IOW, the law disagrees with you. The GPL is enforceable, but hyperlinking is generally OK.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.