John VanSickle <van### [at] erolscom> wrote in message
news:38628B0C.3FD5D834@erols.com...
> http://7am.com/cgi-bin/twires.cgi?1000_t99122101.htm
>
> Methinks the judge is an idiot.

Maybe, maybe not.

I looked at ditto.com using IE and what they have there is thumbnails
that, when clicked, open two windows.
1) a no-menu window with the image *from* the owner's website
2) a second window with menus, etc. that shows the web page *at*
the owner's website showing the image referenced at ditto.com

In both windows the full url of the image's source is in the IE title bar.

No attempt to obscure the ownership and all that seems stored at ditto.com
is a thumbnail ... exactly like any other image server based search engine
I have ever seen on the net.

There well may be a legal issue, but it is hardly a black and white case
of image theft and exploitation.

*AND* any image can be removed from the ditto.com list *AND* ditto.com
provides a page on how to use meta tags and robots.txt so that their search
engine won't index any images at a given site.

So, what's the beef?

Pan

Post a reply to this message