Copyright Implications of "Unconventional Linking" on the World Wide Web: Framing, Deep Linking and Inlining
Brian D. Wassom · Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons (Case Western Reserve University) · 1998
tant of these controversies will involve the rapidly maturing "linking" technologies of the World Wide Web ("WWW" or "Web").The application of copyright principles in these contexts is the subject of much debate, but as the technologies grow in commercial importance, answers to these questions will be of increasing significance.Absent focused efforts by the legal community, resolution of these issues is far from certain.Most high-profile cases to date involving the Internet have not centered on copyright issues; 2 of those that have, many threaten to set sweeping and counterproductive precedents.Already, some courts have held that even basic Internet functions such as viewing a Web page can constitute "copying" for purposes of the copyright laws.3 In the absence of legal certainty, moreover, companies are beginning to promulgate documents such as "linking licenses, ' 4 purporting to authorize activities that copyright law should explicitly deem permissible.Judicial inaction or misconception of the underlying technology, however, could allow such contracts to gain undeserved legitimacy as the de facto standard.Continued procrastination in resolving these dilemmas is inadvisable as exponential growth in the commercial and recreational use of the Web spawns novel copyright questions almost daily.Guidance from Congress and those knowledgeable in the technology is paramount to prevent copyright principles from being misapplied to these novel questions, thus 1 Indeed, just as this Note was nearing completion, a federal district court filed an order that appears to be the first to touch on the copyright ramification of framing, a main subject of this Note.See Futuredontics, Inc., v. Applied Anagramics, Inc., No. CV 97-6991, 1998 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 2265 (C.D. Cal.Jan. 30, 1998) (denying a motion to dismiss a copyright infringement suit against the owner of a framing Web site).The fact that these cases are now beginning to be heard makes the prompt resolution of the questions posed in this Note all the more urgent.2 See, e.g., Reno v. ACLU, 117 S. Ct. 2329 (1997) (striking down portions of the Communications Decency Act of 1996).Despite its lag behind the technology, however, U.S. Internet case law is the most developed in the world.See Meg Carter, Network: Copyright Cases from Washington to Shetland, THE INDEP.(London), August 26, 1997, at Ni. 3 See MAI Systems, Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc., 991 F.2d 511, 518 (9th Cir.1993) (defining "copying" so broadly as to include the loading of a file into a computer's temporary RAM memory).4 See Ellen Poler, Frames and License Agreements (Oct.20, 1997) ("[A] 'workaround' for the problem has been the use of linking agreements by many major commercial Web sites (whether or not they are 'metasites')").5 See Reno, 117 S. Ct. at 2334 (detailing the rapid growth of the Web).