• To: 'Dare Obasanjo' <dareo@m...>, Didier PH Martin <martind@n...>, xml-Dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: XSLT vs. CSS (Re: Indexing)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:52:13 -0500

Right.  The site owner can't stop that and the  
way the user can is to ensure they don't download 
anything with that functionality built in.  One 
cannot control the 'use' of a URI.   Now 
is it legal to build software that zaps that 
functionality.  If the argument is that the owner 
of the desktop controls it, it should be. If I 
were a site owner, I'd give that software away 
for free.  It gives 'killer app' a new meaning.

So again, can a TiVO or VCR chop ads 'on receipt'?
If the argument is based on ownership of the TiVO, 
yes.  If based on free reception of content that 
is paid for, no.  (The TiVO can chop; the TV can't.)  

Does that analogy work for the 
Internet?  Does it make a difference if the 
ad is in the content or imposed on the content?
Apparently, yes.

len


From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@m...]

This is offtopic but your question has been answered by the US judicial
system 
 
   http://news.com.com/2100-1024-1022791.html?part=dtx&tag=ntop

• Prev by Date: RE: XSLT vs. CSS (Re: Indexing)
• Next by Date: RE: XSLT vs. CSS (Re: Indexing)
• Previous by thread: RE: XSLT vs. CSS (Re: Indexing)
• Next by thread: RE: XSLT vs. CSS (Re: Indexing)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread