💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~sloum › geminilist › 005239.gmi captured on 2024-03-21 at 16:43:41. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Vasco Costa vasco.costa at gmx.com
Sun Feb 14 10:33:45 GMT 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 08:32:59AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 07:20:52PM +0000,
Vasco Costa <vasco.costa at gmx.com> wrote
a message of 36 lines which said:
I think that every website that exposes a public API which allows
access to their content indirectly allows the user to redistribute
their content.
This may be your personal opinion but it is not legal advice. This
redistribution is certainly illegal in most legal systems.
Yes, just my layman opinion, however I meant the redistributionconforming to the API terms. For instance, Twitter provides an API fordevelopers to create third-party clients. In my opinion a client thatyou download from an app store, using such API, isn't breaking the lawby showing unaltered tweets. Or otherwise what's the use of such APIs?
Now, like I've also said in my original message, this is to becontrasted with simply scraping a website's HTML where there's not apublic API to extract info. In this case it seems clearer to me thatcontent isn't meant for redistribution.
However, I honestly have no legal background at all, and I'm just tryingto figure out myself what can or cannot constitute infringement. I thinkthis is an important topic and hopefully we can learn from each other'smore or less educated guesses.
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?
Here I agree with Jonathan's answer:
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 10:24:46PM +0000,
Jonathan Lane <jon at dorsal.tk> wrote
a message of 42 lines which said:
I think this would be a lot less legally dicey if it were something
you could run on your own LAN, akin to a caching proxy like Squid.
The big issue is not when you render things in your own way (using
lynx or Dillo is legal) but when you provide access to others.
I totally agree with this as well.
--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/