Bklyn.X wrote:
So it might not be a good idea to have a link posted on our site, right?
K29398 wrote:
We are in the clear. We aren't the one's who posted the original information; we are simply sharing a link that someone already posted in the public domain. Worse that could come of this is they pull the site that the information is hosted on, and the link doesn't work on this site anymore.
Actually, that is a little bit of a gray area in copyright law right now. There are some pending suits that deal with the issue of "contributing to infringment", particularly in the field of internet usage. The question of whether one can be liable for copyright infringement even if one does not copy the protected material is still open in a number contexts. There does not appear to be a definitive answer on whether posting a link to a site for copying the protected material (yes, viewing material from a web page is a form of copying that material since it is copied into the computers memory) gives rise to any liabilty.
If we were dealing with Ford and the way they operate (coming down on mustang and ranger websites), we might want to be careful. But since it is not Ford, and we did not post the copyrighted material, as a practical matter a cease and desist notice would most likely be given before any action was taken. They might seriously go after the original poster, since that could be worth their while -- but based on the current state of the law they would probably leave us alone.
k_enn