"October" wrote:
> I'm starting to feel like Capt'n Oct, King
> of the Bandwidth Pirates or something ;)

I think the bandwidth problem is not as bad as the problem of making other
people's pages obsolete.

> My collection of links serves the povray
> community by providing fast access to both
> the respective files AND the source html.
> For the respective authors of such software,
> this is a GOOD thing, as it may increase
> awareness of their work in the povray
> community.

Awareness of authors' work will increase even more if people visit their
pages where the resources are.

> Publicity, feedback, compliments...
> all of this comes to those who write good
> code and make it publicly available, but
> only if people know where to find it!

That's why regular links to html pages are a good thing.

> For the prospective povray user, my site
> simply provides the very best collection of
> links to "quality" includes and macros
> publicly available on the web. I dare say
> that there may be no other single site in
> existance that is capable of providing such
> concise information so quickly.

Other's have though of it, but for moral reasons they chose not to make it.

> I know it took me over a month to find the
> links that I have there. Most pov'ers know
> the frustration of trying to find a rumored
> include or macro, only to wade through screen
> fulls of dead-end links and unrelated web
> "fluff". I am simply trying to alleviate some
> of this.

There's just as big a chance that a link to a .zip file is a dead-end link
as that a link to a html page is. In a good link collection to html pages
people don't have problems finding the resources.

> Yes, handcrafted webpages can be a thing of
> pride and there are reasons for wanting people
> to see them.My links are not designed to be a
> showcase for pretty websites... it is designed
> to supply answers fast.

Here's the problem. You think you have the right to decide if you want to
link directly or not because it's your page. But it is NOT your resources.
You do not have the right to decide if people must visit the pages in order
to get the resources. It should be the choice of the authors of the
resources.

> As for "common courtesty to let people know
> that you are using their resources in this
> manner", I couldn't agree more. In fact,
> several of the authors whose work I have
> links to have consented, either
> non-specifically (in a readme) or via email.
> To assure that all of them (over 120) recieved
> this same consideration was simply beyond
> my abilities at the time.

It is great that you provide direct links to the resources of those who
accept it, but you shouldn't include links to resources where you have got
no permission at all. Being beyond your abilities is not an excuse.

> I am soon going to be updating my website
> including verification of links. I will be
> personally emailing all authors of any files
> I wish to include in my links to ask for
> permission.

I think this is good. If you begin to have links to resources where you have
got permission only, it will indeed be a great links collection.

> Finally, the implication that posting a
> simple link to an exterior location is
> somehow related to copyright law is simply
> erroneous, and in my opinion, in bad taste...

I was simply quoting Ken.

Greetings,

Rune

---
Updated April 25: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk
Containing 3D images, stereograms, tutorials,
The POV Desktop Theme, 350+ raytracing jokes,
miscellaneous other things, and a lot of fun!

Post a reply to this message