Law Firm Claims Copyright on View of HTML Source 601
An anonymous reader writes "A law firm with all sorts of interesting views on copyright has decided to go the extra mile. As reported on Tech Dirt, they've decided that viewing the HTML source of their site is a violation of copyright. From the site's EULA: 'We also own all of the code, including the HTML code, and all content. As you may know, you can view the HTML code with a standard browser. We do not permit you to view such code since we consider it to be our intellectual property protected by the copyright laws. You are therefore not authorized to do so.'"
Oops... Too Late (Score:4, Interesting)
You viewed the HTML before you are given notice that you are not authorized to view it. What happens in this case? Are you guilty of infringement?
Also, what exactly is the legal definition of 'viewing HTML'? Does it mean reading it with your own eyes, or does it include using a web browser to read it?
Better still: (Score:4, Interesting)
Really though, they are idiots. HTML isn't some magical closed source EXE, as much as they would like it to be.
If you actually read the source you find... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:If you don't want anyone to view (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I'm 'wget' - come arrest me! (Score:2, Interesting)
OpenPopUpLite 2.0.1 action by Nate Baldwin, www.mindpalette.com, copyright 2004
Interesting legal question (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Content? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Generated by a Tool for Tools (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.cybertriallawyer.com/admin [cybertriallawyer.com]
I wonder what the people at Zope.org think about losing copyright to their work?
Mod me up and get me sued... (Score:3, Interesting)
<html>
<head>
<base href="http://www.cybertriallawyer.com/user-agreement/"
<title>User Agreement/Privacy Policy</title>
<meta name="DESCRIPTION" content="Dozier Internet Lawyers: Top rated internet lawyer, internet attorney, internet lawyers, online lawyer, online lawyers, internet attorneys, internet law firm, web lawyer.">
<meta name="KEYWORDS" content="keywords go in here">
<META name="y_key" content="1dfad02220b8c67b"
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta name="generator" content="Adobe GoLive">
<script type="text/javascript" language="JavaScript" src="/imageswap_js"></script>
<csactions>
<csaction name="BF50B80B1" class="Open Popup Lite" type="onevent" val0="PopUp1" val1="680" val2="524" val3="true" val4="false" val5="false" val6="false" val7="false" val8="false" val9="false" val10="true" val11="" val12="" val13="#" val14="qtvr.html" val15="false" urlparams="14,15"></csaction>
</csactions>
<csscriptdict>
<script type="text/javascript"><!--
function CSClickReturn () {
var bAgent = window.navigator.userAgent;
var bAppName = window.navigator.appName;
if ((bAppName.indexOf("Explorer") >= 0) && (bAgent.indexOf("Mozilla/3") >= 0) && (bAgent.indexOf("Mac") >= 0))
return true;
else return false;
}
CSStopExecution=false;
function CSAction(array) {return CSAction2(CSAct, array);}
function CSAction2(fct, array) {
var result;
for (var i=0;i<array.length;i++) {
if(CSStopExecution) return false;
var aa = fct[array[i]];
if (aa == null) return false;
var ta = new Array;
for(var j=1;j<aa.length;j++) {
if((aa[j]!=null)&&(typeof(aa[j])=="object")&&(aa[j].length==2)){
if(aa[j][0]=="VAR"){ta[j]=CSStateArray[aa[j][1]];}
else{if(aa[j][0]=="ACT"){ta[j]=CSAction(new Array(new String(aa[j][1])));}
else ta[j]=aa[j];}
} else ta[j]=aa[j];
}
result=aa[0](ta);
}
return result;
}
CSAct = new Object;
They use an OSS CMS, nice. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:For those who are too lazy to do some digging.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Cache-Control: no-render (Score:3, Interesting)
As if someone couldn't mock it using other markup.
For "intarweb lawyers", they sure don't understand the internet.
Morons.
Re:Content? (Score:3, Interesting)
The results of this could be used in a lot of things from product advertising, public image control, and even motivating voters to come out for a cause. It this is a test to develop a theory or justify it, or just see what would happen to compare current tactics to the results.
Or maybe it is just a ploy to get free advertising. I mean it gets their name out, make it known, and what are the chances of someone who barely remembers their name, remembering why when they need a lawyer? Two years from now, they will probably be one of the most popular law firms on the net.
Re:Now sue me. Pls ! (Score:5, Interesting)
These lawyers ought to know better (Score:5, Interesting)
They "own all the code" MY ASS. Perhaps they retained the services of Mindpalette to design their website or their own developers used some of their code, but this statement indicated to me that they DO NOT own at least a good chunk of the JavaScript in this file. Have they done their "due diligence" concerning their IP? Are the (retarded) terms-of-service on this web page compatible with the terms of service agreed to by Mr. Baldwin? I am the author of some GPLed scripts myself, and if I discovered they were used on this site I would take issue and even consider legal action!
Geez...get any 10 lawyers together, one will be a real decent person, the other nine will be total asshats.
Just on general principle... (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.cybertriallawyer.com/common/image3.jpg [cybertriallawyer.com]
Geodetector In Da House (Score:2, Interesting)
Here's there embedded detector URL: http://geodetector.com/geo767 [geodetector.com]
The firm is "Dozier Internet Law" (Score:5, Interesting)
Mr. Dozier served his legal process by creating an account on our forum and sending a poorly-spelled diatribe using the "report to moderator" feature. In the end I nuked the spam (it was spam, after all), but not before solving the "legal problem" once and for all by banning his account and IP block from the server.
Re:Now sue me. Pls ! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Cache-Control: no-render (Score:2, Interesting)
Browse-wrap being "by viewing this post you agree to pay me 1000 dollars". Now, if there was a [I agree] button that you click on before entering the site... That could be a valid contract, unless the court decides its unconscionable.
...and they are hosting p0rn! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Now sue me. Pls ! (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.cybertriallawyer.com/user-agreement [cybertriallawyer.com]
HTML error (1/5): The DOCTYPE declaration is missing.
HTML error (3/63): Illegal character "/" in tag.
HTML error (9/49): Illegal character "/" in tag.
HTML error (14/13): The tag is unknown in this HTML standard.
HTML error (15/286): The tag is unknown in this HTML standard.
HTML error (15/297): The tag is unknown in this HTML standard.
HTML error (15/297): Can't find start tag for end tag . Maybe the tag was implicitly closed before.
HTML error (16/14): The tag is unknown in this HTML standard.
HTML error (16/14): Can't find start tag for end tag . Maybe the tag was implicitly closed before.
HTML error (17/16): The tag is unknown in this HTML standard.
HTML error (88/17): The tag is unknown in this HTML standard.
HTML error (88/17): Can't find start tag for end tag . Maybe the tag was implicitly closed before.
HTML error (89/16): The tag is unknown in this HTML standard.
HTML error (94/17): The tag is unknown in this HTML standard.
HTML error (94/17): Can't find start tag for end tag . Maybe the tag was implicitly closed before.
HTML warning (100/354): The attribute "LEFTMARGIN" is deprecated in the tag and should no longer be used. It is suggested CSS be used instead.
HTML warning (100/354): The attribute "TOPMARGIN" is deprecated in the tag and should no longer be used. It is suggested CSS be used instead.
HTML warning (100/354): The attribute "MARGINWIDTH" is deprecated in the tag and should no longer be used. It is suggested CSS be used instead.
HTML warning (100/354): The attribute "MARGINHEIGHT" is deprecated in the tag and should no longer be used. It is suggested CSS be used instead.
HTML error (168/19): Illegal character "/" in tag.
HTML error (175/19): Illegal character "/" in tag.
HTML error (222/17): The attribute "CASS" in tag
is not allowed.
HTML error (224/17): The attribute "CASS" in tag
is not allowed.
HTML error (226/17): The attribute "CASS" in tag
is not allowed.
HTML error (228/17): The attribute "CASS" in tag
is not allowed.
HTML error (230/17): The attribute "CASS" in tag
is not allowed.
HTML error (232/17): The attribute "CASS" in tag
is not allowed.
HTML error (234/17): The attribute "CASS" in tag
is not allowed.
HTML error (236/17): The attribute "CASS" in tag
is not allowed.
HTML error (238/17): The attribute "CASS" in tag
is not allowed.
HTML error (240/17): The attribute "CASS" in tag
is not allowed.
HTML error (242/17): The attribute "CASS" in tag
is not allowed.
HTML warning (267/75): The attribute "HEIGHT" is deprecated in the tag and should no longer be used. It is suggested CSS be used instead.
http://www.cybertriallawyer.com/Dozier_css [cybertriallawyer.com]
CSS Error (23/17): Invalid property value "bold".
CSS Error (336/7): Invalid property value "margin:".
CSS Error (336/7): Unknown identifier ":".
CSS Error (368/10): Invalid class selector.
Re:These lawyers ought to know better (Score:5, Interesting)
They "own all the code" MY ASS. Perhaps they retained the services of Mindpalette to design their website or their own developers used some of their code, but this statement indicated to me that they DO NOT own at least a good chunk of the JavaScript in this file. Have they done their "due diligence" concerning their IP? Are the (retarded) terms-of-service on this web page compatible with the terms of service agreed to by Mr. Baldwin? I am the author of some GPLed scripts myself, and if I discovered they were used on this site I would take issue and even consider legal action!
It's very funny. The acts of paying for an internet connection and a computer, setting up a server and a domain name, and put these html pages unsecured upon that server is an act of publication. That interpretation is why Kazaa lady got nailed. The thing being published is not a browsing experience, it is a text file. I can use any tool I wish to view and interpret that text file, be it one I downloaded or one I wrote myself.
Unless they have secured the pages against free access and collected an agreement to terms of use prior to transmitting this text file, they can not retroactively enforce them. This means they cannot enforce that I use any particular viewing medium for the text.
However, what they have done is materially represented in the same site that they own the technology and the copyrights as a corporation, and also that the copyrights are some individuals property.
If it isn't fraudulent on the basis that they use the obvious message to intimidate people via legal threats without basis in fact into not seeing the contradictory ownership message in the comments, it's most certainly too sloppy to be borne on the front page of a site run by Internet Lawyers.
I knew lawyers were scum, but I figured it would be necessary for them to be at least somewhat smarter to get in the door. Apparently not.
GoLive (Score:3, Interesting)
I happen to like it and think it's a fairly decent tool, but I can imagine in the hands of someone who was totally clueless, and only used it in the WYSIWYG mode
The idea is that it's very easy to switch from "Layout View" (WYSIWYG) to a nice color-coded HTML view, and from there to previewing it in your browser(s) of choice. I don't think the author in this case got the idea.
Spammer defenders? :D (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Now sue me. Pls ! (Score:2, Interesting)