On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 05:51:31PM +0000, Nico wrote: > I disagree. We're not re-hosting their content on gemini, we're just using > gemini as an interface to view it. Viewing medium in a web browser is a > painfully slow experience, we are simply creating a better viewing > experience for ourselves. > Would you use the same argument against, eg. A mobile twitter client? > Twitter posts also aren't an open license. Just my 2 cents. This thread touches an important topic, which I've been wondering myself for a while now. Regarding your particular question, I think that every website that exposes a public API which allows access to their content indirectly allows the user to redistribute their content. So, this is not the same as scraping a website's HTML. That being said, where do we draw the line between providing an interface and simply copying/redistributing third-party content? By reduction to absurdity, if we create a web browser that cannot render some HTML tags used by ads or that does not interpret javascript, are we also just copying/modifying content? In this case I don't think we are, so it's not a simple matter. On the other hand, there's also the more philosophical question which has also been mentioned. Should Gemini care only about exclusive content and services, or is it fine to get a lot of content from other platforms? -- Vasco Costa AKA gluon. Enthusiastic about computers, motorsports, science, technology, travelling and TV series. Yes I'm a bit of a geek. Gemini: gemini://gluonspace.com/ Gopher: gopher://gopher.geeksphere.tk/
---
Previous in thread (8 of 18): 🗣️ Stephane Bortzmeyer (stephane (a) sources.org)
Next in thread (10 of 18): 🗣️ Solène Rapenne (solene (a) perso.pw)