Comments on: Judges Want Fair Use of Google Porn http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/05/judges-want-fair-use-of-google-porn.html Internet Marketing News Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:00:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: MyNetNuke http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/05/judges-want-fair-use-of-google-porn.html/comment-page-1#comment-26350 MyNetNuke Fri, 18 May 2007 13:30:23 +0000 http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/05/judges-want-fair-use-of-google-porn.html#comment-26350 My opinion is similar to Terry's. If you want to prevent indexing of content you can secure your pages/images, also use robots.txt to filter spiders. But when it comes to stole content. These things change. My opinion is similar to Terry’s. If you want to prevent indexing of content you can secure your pages/images, also use robots.txt to filter spiders.

But when it comes to stole content. These things change.

]]> By: Terry Howard http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/05/judges-want-fair-use-of-google-porn.html/comment-page-1#comment-26292 Terry Howard Thu, 17 May 2007 16:56:12 +0000 http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/05/judges-want-fair-use-of-google-porn.html#comment-26292 I guess this really shows we need to answer some basic legal questions regarding web hosting and what it implies in relation to indexing and caching. In my opinion, if you place content in a public location that is linked from other pages that you are opening encouraging to be indexed, then that implies to the spider that the linked content follows the same guidelines, unless said otherwise by one of the many ways a developer can designate content as off limits. Sort of like a files inheriting the permissions of the folder it is contained within, so does crawling rights. I think the smoking gun is that engines get content based off linking and have put in place easy and apparent means of excluding content. The idea of using analogies of leaving your door unlocked not excusing unlawful entry (a common one I've read) is not comparable. The issue needs to be considered on its own merits not by nonparallel abstractions or by judges who can't barely charge their cell phone, much less understand networking, web serving and search technology. I guess this really shows we need to answer some basic legal questions regarding web hosting and what it implies in relation to indexing and caching. In my opinion, if you place content in a public location that is linked from other pages that you are opening encouraging to be indexed, then that implies to the spider that the linked content follows the same guidelines, unless said otherwise by one of the many ways a developer can designate content as off limits. Sort of like a files inheriting the permissions of the folder it is contained within, so does crawling rights. I think the smoking gun is that engines get content based off linking and have put in place easy and apparent means of excluding content. The idea of using analogies of leaving your door unlocked not excusing unlawful entry (a common one I’ve read) is not comparable. The issue needs to be considered on its own merits not by nonparallel abstractions or by judges who can’t barely charge their cell phone, much less understand networking, web serving and search technology.

]]> By: Ruby on Rails Examples http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/05/judges-want-fair-use-of-google-porn.html/comment-page-1#comment-26287 Ruby on Rails Examples Thu, 17 May 2007 16:00:01 +0000 http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/05/judges-want-fair-use-of-google-porn.html#comment-26287 These are good news. Google Rocks These are good news. Google Rocks

]]>