Blog: The absolute latest random thoughts

Kari Byron news

previous posts:

eHarmony 'The Compatible Marriage' a scam?

Eureka! A sign that makes sense!

Midway Shopping Center - 'sign' of the times!

feeding frenzy number 7 (or seven?) - Google Searc...

I Miss Apache Plaza!

William Shatner, prophet?

Caught in a podcast timewarp!

Do you know where your printout has been?

Viagra and Cialis aren't needed with Kari Byron

Frustrated Webmasters and Google searches

earlier posts:

09.2002   10.2002   11.2002   12.2002   01.2003   02.2003   03.2003   04.2003   05.2003   06.2003   07.2003   08.2003   09.2003   10.2003   11.2003   12.2003   01.2004   02.2004   03.2004   04.2004   05.2004   06.2004   07.2004   08.2004   09.2004   10.2004   11.2004   12.2004   01.2005   02.2005   03.2005   04.2005   05.2005   06.2005   07.2005   08.2005   09.2005   10.2005   11.2005   12.2005   01.2006   02.2006   03.2006   04.2006   05.2006   06.2006   07.2006   08.2006   09.2006   10.2006   11.2006   12.2006   04.2007   05.2007   06.2007   07.2007   08.2007   12.2007   01.2008   02.2008   05.2008   06.2008   07.2008   08.2008   12.2008   01.2009   02.2009   03.2009   04.2009   05.2009   06.2009   07.2009   09.2009   10.2009   11.2009   12.2009   01.2010   02.2010   03.2010   04.2010   05.2010   06.2010   07.2010   08.2010   09.2010   10.2010   11.2010   12.2010   01.2011   02.2011   03.2011   04.2011   05.2011   06.2011   07.2011   09.2011   10.2011   11.2011   12.2011   01.2012   02.2012   04.2012   07.2012   10.2012   11.2012   01.2013   02.2013   03.2013   05.2013   05.2014   06.2014   07.2014   12.2014   01.2015   02.2015   03.2015   06.2015   11.2015   02.2016   03.2016   04.2016   05.2016   06.2016   11.2016   04.2017   10.2017  


The ethics of hotlinking?

Okay, folks, I need your ethical opinion here. In the context I use it in this blog, what do you think of hotlinking? Here's a description, from the article Bandwidth theft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

"Web pages may link to other web pages using hyperlinks. The hyperlink object allows a viewer to click on a link to reach another site. The owner supplies bandwidth as a gift, or to sell something, etc.

"It is possible to use a HTML tag in a webpage to embed material from another site in it. Thus when the webpage is sent to someone to view, the bandwidth for the embedded material is supplied by the owner of the second site. Simply linking to a file is also considered to be bandwidth theft.

"This may not be desirable for the owner of the second site: he or she may only be willing to supply the material, with the corresponding bandwidth, if that material is viewed embedded in his or her own webpages, e.g. because otherwise it does not help him earn money which compensates for the bandwidth cost.

"This may be considered unfair and even be called 'bandwidth theft'. If there are no copyright restrictions, it would be considered fairer if the owner of the first site puts copies of the embedded material on his or her own site. If there are copyright restrictions, the alternative would be to just link to the other site."

Now, here's my issue. I can very, very easily take images and post them to my Blogger site via Hello. I'm not "stealing images because I'm lazy". In fact, I'm not "stealing images" at all, and that's the point. You sometimes see images on this blog, and the folks who put those images out on the internet are the ones who own/control those images. I'm linking to their material, displaying the image that's publicly accessible. If I download the image and serve it off a server that I control, they no longer control their image. To me, that seems to be further away from "fair use" than displaying something that's already publicly available on the 'net.

Does that make sense?

Note also that I'm putting this in the context of my use here. I think it's unethical to take someone else's graphic and use it on your site as your own, for your own purposes, independent of their original use. For example, if I took the image of the happy eHarmony couple from the last post and put it on my blog as an example of happy couples in general, that would be wrong -- especially if I were hotlinking to it. But if I'm posting a critique of eHarmony, and I can link to eHarmony's site, what are the ethics surrounding the display of a relevant image -- the image that people will see as soon as they click on the link I'm providing? The image isn't making my site "pretty"; it's encouraging people to follow the link to the site the image came from. That's what it's all about, right?

With so many people against hotlinking as "bandwidth theft", what's the feeling about hotlinking as "content ownership preservation"?


Post a Comment

<< Home


emlarson.com:   Home | Blog | Work | Tech | Life | Lord | Play | Mail

Entire site contents Copyright © 2000-2005 Eric M. Larson

All rights reserved, please don't steal my stuff, etc. etc. etc.