Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Cod]

I'm not sure if what I did was infringement of a copyright or not, but I was hoping you guys could give me some answers. Here's the story:

I posted a link to weight training program that's on the internet. Now, the link is NOT my site, I just found it through Google. For me posting the link to this program, the owner has threaten me with copyright infringement even though the site with the program does not belong to me. Also, nowhere on the page with the program is there anything saying this program is copyright. Am I still liable?

I would go to a lawyer and ask these question, but I'm in college and really can't afford to even talk to one.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

[Cod]

Or since its a written program, would it qualify as a trade secret? Meaning I cannot be held liable?

[M. Arthur Auslander]

Dear Cod,

Without taking professional responsibiliy nor doing research, my gut says there is no infringement. It might be an unconstitutional restriction on free speach.

[Cod]

Well, I did some research on the program that I linked, and I didn't find a copyright ANYWHERE. Also, its a program of set items of exercises meaning its a trade secret, correct? And last I remember, those cannot be held up in court.

[Isaac]

With or without a copyright notice and with or without registration, creative expression fixed in a tangible medium is protectablke by copyright.  

Your search means very little.

A software program might contain trade secrets and be copyright protected.

[nobody]

Linking (and in particular, deep linking) may be actionable on other grounds, but as far as I know, it's not copyright infringment, even though cease and desist notices have contended otherwise. Court opinions seem to vary, however "So far, courts have found that deep links to web pages were neither a copyright infringement nor a trespass." See:

http://www.chillingeffects.org/linking/

[Dave41]

I seem to remember one or two instances where linking was considered copyright infringement. However, the courts found linking constituted infringement only after the website was ordered to remove infringing material posted on the site (DeCSS code in one case). The site operator removed the infringing material and replaced it with links to other sites containing the infringing material. The courts then found linking constituted copyright infringement (if my memory serves me correctly).

[Isaac]

The DECSS case was very complex because it involved tradesecrets and the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA.  I believe any copyright infringement arguments surrounded the material protected by CSS rather than the DECSS code itself.

As far as deep linking itself is concerned, there are a lot of cases where cease and desist letters worked and where plaintiffs or defendants settled things early in the litigation process, and very few court decisions establishing precedent.

[nobody]

Yes but I believe you two are referring to situations where the linked-to content was either illegally posted material (you linked to infringing material) and you are guilty of contributory infringement OR you linked to sites that supposedly violates the DMCA (nonsense) because it offers anti-copyprotection software. That differs from linking to legal content that was legally posted/published. In any case, re-read the question, he is not referring to *computer* programs.

[clarklawyer]

Yes but I believe you two are referring to situations where the linked-to content was either illegally posted material (you linked to infringing material) and you are guilty of contributory infringement OR you linked to sites that supposedly violates the DMCA (nonsense) because it offers anti-copyprotection software. That differs from linking to legal content that was legally posted/published. In any case, re-read the question, he is not referring to *computer* programs.

I was aware of the content of the original post.   My response was intended to show that the DeCSS precedents were not completely applicable.

Dave41 did not appear to confuse computer programs with weight training programs either.  

I'm a little baffled at why you think we are confused.

[nobody]

I wasn't at all implying that you were confused. I just figured you answered the question on-the-fly. Your first reply stated "Your search means very little.  A software program might contain trade secrets and be copyright protected." rather than directly answering the question about linking. Why bring that up there?

Maybe the question really IS about a software program on training rather than online pages on training. He could have been more clear. However it seems evident that simply linking to legal content is not copyright infringement, otherwise I have just infringed...

http://www.chillingeffects.org/linking/faq.cgi

[clarklawyer]

I wasn't at all implying that you were confused. I just figured you answered the question on-the-fly. Your first reply stated "Your search means very little.  A software program might contain trade secrets and be copyright protected." rather than directly answering the question about linking. Why bring that up there?

Maybe the question really IS about a software program on training rather than online pages on training. He could have been more clear. However it seems evident that simply linking to legal content is not copyright infringement, otherwise I have just infringed...

http://www.chillingeffects.org/linking/faq.cgi

My point was only that trade secret and copyright protection were not mutually exclusive.   I gave an example using software after the original poster asked about trade secret protection.  

Actually, if someone spells out  the entire program on a public web page, it does not seem feasible to argue that they have maintained the secrecy required for trade secret protection.

I don't think you are mistaken in saying that a computer program is not involved here.

[clarklawyer]

I have seen a number of sites that have notices on them requiring that you seek permission before linking to them.   For example, NPR used to have such a published policy, although they changed it after receiving some negative feedback about it.

I don't believe that a copyright infringement suit would work ot prevent linking to a copyrighted work, but maybe some kind of unauthorized access suit might work if the link on your page significantly increased traffic to their site, or if the link bypassed the front door of a site which required registration or even pay for access.