Linking = Showing = Transferring?

[tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)]

I posted this to the Cyberia mailing list, but think it has some
implications for Cypherpunks as well. And, I'm responding to Duncan
Frissell, one of our own.

(I don't advise subscribing to Cyberia unless legal issues interest you and
you have the time for another high-volume mailing list. Still, some bright
folks there--as well as some dullards. David Friedman just joined the list.
To subscribe, send a message to listserv@listserv.cc.wm.edu with the
message body of subscribe cyberia-l YourNameHere.)

>
>To:cyberia-l@warthog.cc.wm.edu
>From:tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)
>Subject:Linking = Showing = Transferring?
>
>
>As good a chance as any to extend my "showing = telling" point...
>
>At 9:32 AM 9/14/95, Duncan Frissell wrote:
>
>>And my favorite: "What if the student merely includes *links* to
>>the above on his web page?"  Of course racist images/messages are
>>always and everywhere as legal as church on a Sunday although they
>>may carry civil liability in limited cases -- not a problem for
>>judgment-proof students.
>...
>>"Is the URL the page itself? --- Unanswered philosophical questions
>>of the wired age."
>
>_Linking_ is effectively _showing_, given the point-and-click mechanics of
>hypertext. This is a situation anticipated by authors (e.g. Ted Nelson),
>but is now coming to the fore.
>
>Granted, providing a link is not the same as actually _including_ the
>material the link points to, but it is very, very close. Arguably, the
>same.
>
>(Example: I create a home page with links to many images that are child
>pornography by U.S. standards. The images themselves may be initially
>stored in URLs that are in countries with different standards for consent,
>e.g., Denmark or Thailand. Have I violated the child porn laws? Arguably,
>I am "making available" these materials, but all I have done is to provide
>the _pointers_. The readers of my home page are the actual downloaders,
>not me.)
>
>I can imagine rebuttals to this position, arguing that an author who
>includes URLs to other places is doing nothing different than an author
>who includes footnoted references to other works (and surely we all agree
>that footnotes are not copyright infringements of any sort).
>
>However, look at how the Web is being used. Home pages that have
>compilations of interesting things are effectively the works! It is as if
>the original materials are being stored on those home pages themselves!
>
>There is _technological_ and _propertarian_ fix to this: controlled or
>paid access to the URLs under question. The "gatekeeper" function shifts
>to the actual material under question.
>
>But there are many new questions.
>
>And Duncan's specific point remains:
>
>-- is it a violation of pornography laws (perhaps campus rules) to have a
>home page with links to URLs containing pornographic images?
>
>-- is it a violation of _child pornography_ laws to have a home page with
>links to URLs containing child pornography images? (The URLs could be
>offshore, perhaps in jurisdictions where the age of consent is much
>different than in the U.S., e.g., Denmark or Thailand.)
>
>-- is it a violation of national security laws to have a home page with
>links to URLs containing national defense secrets? (The URLs could be
>offshore.)
>
>-- is it a violation of copyright/patent laws to have home pages with
>pointers to protected material? (Songs, written works, images, inventions,
>etc.)
>
>And so on....
>
>--Tim May

---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
Corralitos, CA              | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^756839      | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."