{"id":900,"date":"2008-08-06T05:30:56","date_gmt":"2008-08-05T20:30:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/2008-08-06\/900"},"modified":"2008-08-06T05:30:56","modified_gmt":"2008-08-05T20:30:56","slug":"dont-confuse-me-with-the-facts-image-linking-and-distribution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/2008-08-06\/900","title":{"rendered":"“Don’t Confuse Me With The Facts”: Image Linking and Distribution"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n

Carolyn Wright is a lawyer who specializes in photo-related copyright\nissues, and writes a low<\/span>-volume blog on the subject, Photo Attorney<\/a>. She sometimes<\/span> has\ninteresting or informative posts, such as stories of people improperly\narrested just for taking photographs in public.<\/p>\n\n

As you might imagine, the subject of photographic copyright sometimes\ncrosses paths with technology, and that spells trouble for someone who\ndoesn't understand the technology. Carolyn doesn't make gaffes of the series-of-tubes<\/a>\nnature, but I've cringed at times when she tries to talk about\ntechnology.<\/p>\n\n

Such was the case the other day, in a post<\/span> about\n“hotlinking”<\/a>. Hotlinking is the embedding of a reference<\/span> to someone\nelse's image directly in your web page, as opposed to linking to the\nimage-owner's web page with the image. She referred<\/span> to the author of the\nimage reference as someone who “infringes” by “reproducing your image”.<\/p>\n\n

Whether something is or isn't copyright infringement is solely determined\nby the law (copyright is a concept<\/span> of the law, not a physical<\/span> process\nsubject to absolute truth), but it's ludicrous to refer to an image\nreference as “reproducing an image”.<\/p>\n\n

If referring to an image is copyright infringement, I will be<\/span> infringing on Carolyn's copyright\nin this box:<\/p>\n\n

http:\/\/www.photoattorney.com\/uploaded_images\/GrizGrowl-711860.jpg<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n

This is not hotlinking, but on one level it's technically identical in that I've included a reference<\/span> to another person's image in my page.\n(This clarification sentence was added after initial publication)<\/small><\/p>\n\n

I'd better hope I'm right in believing that it's not<\/i> copyright\ninfringement to simply refer to the web address of another's image, because\nI've actually placed two<\/i> references to the same image in that box:\nthe reference your browser shows you (the letters “h”, “t”, “t”, “p” ....),\nand a separate<\/span> reference your browser is not showing you, in HTML code,\nthat your browser may interpret as the address of a web<\/span> page to visit,\nshould you click on the text of the first reference (the one showing).<\/p>\n\n

Double, willful infringement.<\/p>\n\n

In referring to what I believe to be the web address of one of Carolyn's\nimages – there's no guarantee there's even an image there – at\nno time do I make a copy<\/span><\/b> of Carolyn's image, store<\/b> Carolyn's\nimage, serve<\/b> Carolyn's image, reproduce<\/b> Carolyn's image, or\ndistribute<\/b> Carolyn's image. I don't<\/span> do anything with Caryoln's\nimage, any more than I do<\/span> anything with Carolyn herself by writing her\nname.<\/p>\n\n

Anyone who knows the least bit about web technology would never\nseriously say that referring to the web address of an image is “reproducing\nthe image”, so I sent<\/span> a kindly<\/span> note to Carolyn. She replied “Hotlinking\nreproduces the image<\/i>”. Um, no, that's what I was<\/span> writing to correct.<\/p>\n\n

So, I wrote<\/span> to Carolyn again, being more verbose, using simpler wording. Her reply<\/span> was what one might expect from a lawyer<\/span>: ignoring what was\naddressed, and reiterating what she said the first time.<\/p>\n\n

Sigh. Sorry to have confused you with the facts.<\/p>\n\n

Be clear about one thing: in this post, as in my messages to Carolyn, I make no<\/span> statement about whether I think<\/span> hotlinking is good or bad. There\nare many cases where hotlinking is evil, but like anything, it can good or\nbad.<\/p>\n\n

I also don't make any statement above as to whether I believe<\/span> hotlinking\nis, or should be, considered copyright infringement, but I'll offer that\nopinion here: how can it be considered copyright infringement to talk about\nan image? An HTML link<\/span> is just that, a passive<\/span> reference to an image. It's an entirely<\/span> unrelated third party – the reader's<\/b> web browser\n– that decides to follow up on that reference and ask the image's\nserver for a copy<\/span> of the image to display to the reader.<\/p>\n\n

If merely referring to the web address of a copyrighted<\/span> work is actually\ncopyright infringement, I have no<\/span> doubt that Carolyn will be angered at my\ndouble, willful infringement above. But she'd better not be too angry,\nbecause she's a copyright<\/span> infringer herself: she willfully infringed on\nmy<\/b> copyright by linking to my copyrighted web page in a post<\/span> last\nyear about\nimage metadata<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Carolyn Wright is a lawyer who specializes in photo-related copyright issues, and writes a low-volume blog on the subject, Photo Attorney. She sometimes has interesting or informative posts, such as stories of people improperly arrested just for taking photographs in public.<\/p>

As you might imagine, the subject of photographic copyright sometimes crosses paths with technology, and that spells trouble for someone who doesn't understand the technology. Carolyn doesn't make gaffes of the series-of-tubes nature, but I've cringed at times when she tries to talk about technology.<\/p>

Such was the case the other day, in a post about \"hotlinking\". Hotlinking is [...]","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7,1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/900"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=900"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/900\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=900"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=900"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=900"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}