💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~sloum › geminilist › 005212.gmi captured on 2023-11-14 at 10:15:18. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Vasco Costa vasco.costa at gmx.com
Sat Feb 13 19:20:52 GMT 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
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 myselffor a while now. Regarding your particular question, I think that everywebsite that exposes a public API which allows access to their contentindirectly allows the user to redistribute their content. So, this isnot the same as scraping a website's HTML.
That being said, where do we draw the line between providing aninterface and simply copying/redistributing third-party content?
By reduction to absurdity, if we create a web browser that cannot rendersome HTML tags used by ads or that does not interpret javascript, are wealso 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 whichhas also been mentioned. Should Gemini care only about exclusive contentand services, or is it fine to get a lot of content from otherplatforms?
--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/