Reader Comments on Mind that link
From: Rick Shera Having written 30,000+ words on linking and framing under NZ copyright law for my masters degreee a couple of years ago, I don't really think that linking per se is much of an issue in NZ. IMHO, it is impliedly licensed when someone puts something on the net. Of course the implied licence can be displaced by the website owner by putting a notice to that effect on their site. In any case, since there is technically no copying going on by virtue of the link (a fact missed in some of the cases that have made it to the courts worldwide and by many commentators) it is difficult to argue copyright infringement. One ends up arguing that all viewing of website material is copying which may be technically correct (caching etc vs impermanence arguments) but is a practical nonsense (implied licence principles would be sufficent to allow this anyway even if technical copying is found). Framing is the same under copyright law but it is easier for a complainant to get home under passing off/fair trading principles where the frame often gives the impression of ownership by the framing site (particularly where the URL ref in the address box does not change). You are dead right however about this becoming a major commercial issue. One only has to scan the SEC filings in the US to see the seriousness (read $$ involved) of the arrangements that are being entered into to cover linking/co-branding arrangements. The other important factor to be aware of is that this is an area where there are significant differences between NZ and US, the latter having an overlay of first amendment free speech principles and fair use which is not really relevant in NZ. Instead we have very specific and narrow exceptions under the Copyright Act (eg for libraries). Rick Shera MComLaw (Hons)Now Have Your Say
Home | Today's Headlines | Contact | New Sites | Job Centre | Investment Centre