Re: Interesting Twist to BANNER ADVERTISING
DAVID MCKNIGHT WROTE:
> This would not be theft, but it would clearly be a
> copyright violation if you did not have an agreement
> with the content holder to alter the page that was
> being served...
>
> Even republishing someone's page within a frame has
> been held in court to be a violation of copyright. If
> you own a third party product on the other hand that
> filters banner ads, that may be considered legal. But I
> am not aware of any third party product that filters
> and replaces banner ads legally in a commercial
> environment.
Interesting...I would be very to the case cite
for that. Because, that would be SEVERE departure from
existing copyright law. Which is something judges do
not normally do. There have been many cases involving
cable and newspaper advertising where the law holds
that the content provider CANNOT make an intellectual
property claim on advertisements. The advertiser can
make such a claim, but first they must provide a
copyright statement in the advertisement. So, the
person you have to worry about is not the content
provider, but the replaced advertiser coming after you.
Guess what if the have the trademark symbol (TM) or (R)
symbol they can and will enforce it.
Received on Fri Jan 21 2000 - 17:17:26 CST
