From a legal standpoint, AutoLink looks questionable. The tool modifies publisher's web pages by adding hypertext links without the publisher's consent. While this modification isn't a huge change, I could still see some (many?) courts treating them as unauthorized derivative works. Honestly, it seems like a fairly routine copyright infringement.

Publishing · 2005/03/05 · 5 COMMENTS · Link

Comments

I bought a rubber-stamp maker which allows me, should I wish, to create 'unauthorized derivative works' from print-outs of websites. Time to enjoin Office Depot?

#1 · nick sweeney · 2005/03/07

epinions? what's that?

big deal, a guy has a law degree and worked for a dismal dotcom.

seems like a fairly obvious case of idiocy, honestly.

#2 · jerry · 2005/03/07

I don't buy that argument. As I see it, the end user uses Google Toolbar to enhance his browser's display of the original web page, analogous to hitting Ctrl-+ to increase the displayed text size on this browser, or to running one of those text-to-voice readers which people with bad eyesight use.

#3 · W. Kiernan · 2005/03/07

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Goldman, who from his bio, is teaching the following subjects at Marquette Law: cyberlaw, intellectual property, copyrights, contracts, licensing and professional responsibility.

#4 · Rogers Cadenhead · 2005/03/07

Thank you!
My homepage | Please visit

#5 · Michelle · 2006/05/17

Add a Comment

All comments are moderated before publication. These HTML tags are permitted: <p>, <b>, <i>, <a>, and <blockquote>. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA (for which the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply).