Linking to web resources - what happens when they disappear?

Linking to web resources - what happens when they disappear?

by David McCarthy -
Number of replies: 4

We are linking to resources on the web. Some of these are blogs & other articles. One has just disappeared - even the website seems to have gone. Obviusly we need to check links regularly, but what of the content?

So, the questions are:

  1. If a resource has disappeared from the web, is it OK to use a previously captured PDF copy of it?
  2. If "yes" in 1., should the PDF include the attribution to the original link?
  3. Does the copyright still exist if the original doesn't?
  4. Against the day when certain 'vulnerable' links disappear, would it be ethical (and legal) to create the PDF copy and use it now (to prevent broken links)?

I would only want to do this for single articles of interest.

While a link to (say)"Better writing" at Oxford Dictionaries Online (part of OUP) might change in the future, it's unlikely to disappear completely, and that section of their site contains large numbers of pages - this would be something we would not want or attempt to 'capture'.

Your thoughts and suggestions would be much appreciated.

David.

Average of ratings: -
In reply to David McCarthy

Re: Linking to web resources - what happens when they disappear?

by Derek Chirnside -

I actually was waiting for someone more knowledgeable to reply.

In some respects this depends on the jurisdiction you are under.  And the type of material.  Articles (as in say an online journal) will usually have a (c) statement.  Some blogs do as well.

In NZ we have a "Fair use" provision, and my personal rule of thumb is "What would I say if I was in court?" and as we have (c) people to ask at a national (C) agency.

Dead links are a problem.  I have reworked material to solve this in the past, like sets of instructions for a process. I have extracted quotes - often this has been all we need.

In my personal teaching, I keep copies of a LOT of stuff because even quite robust sites have gone down for good. Ethical?  Legal?  Hmm.  Better legal brains will have to come in here - I use this under the "prsonal Study" provisons, but it is different if in a future time I USE he copy with a course.

The OUP example: yes, a problem.  I just trust the function will be picked up by someone else.

Q3 appealed to my sense of humour.  10,000 copies of Rambo IV in movie theatres exist and a fire destrys the original.  Does the (c) still exist?

-Derek
Who hates copyright questions, and has had to work with many academics who have no regard for copyright even on my own work.  I was once handed a pile of pages to work work into publishable form with my own stuff in it, complete with "Copyable only within purchasing schools" on the footer.  angry

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Derek Chirnside

Re: Linking to web resources - what happens when they disappear?

by Russell Waldron -

David, this is such a problem for all of us in education and training.

In Australia, a good starting point for copyright discussions for non-lawyers like us is The Copyright Council. From their information sheets, I tentatively reached this understanding:

1. PDF copies:

The Fair Use or Fair Dealing provisions of the copyright law in your jurisdiction might help. In Australia, you are usually entitled to include limited portions of a document within your commentary on that document. That's not a license to link to a separate, complete copy of a document, but maybe there's a lawyer around who would opine on whether it might permit a link to a heavily annotated copy.

2. Attribution:

Yes. Apart from any legal obligation, attribute the source because a customer will think you more honest; because an academic will respect your scholarship; because a researcher will find your attribution useful; and because an author/creator will feel respected and valued.

3. Copyright outlives the original:

Yes. There is absolutely no question that, for example, Lloyd-Webber's right to control performances of "Cats" would still exist even if the original autograph manuscript had been destroyed and we only had digital copies.

4. Preservation:

The ethical issue is that distributing a part of someone's work may deprive them of income (e.g. direct sales of the material, advertising revenue, or brand-awareness) or increase their costs (e.g. support load, slashdotting), and does deprive them of control.

The copyright owner can give you explicit permission to do anything at all with her/his work.

Without the owner's permission, the Copyright Act in my country gives me limited rights: for example, students have entitlements to make partial copies to enable them to study the work individually; teachers can give limited access to partial copies within a closed class; the public has a limited entitlement to parody or reproduce part of the work in order to express an opinion; and copyright expires after a (very long) time. The limits on these are complicated, involving both a schedule in the Act and interpretations yet to be tested/made in future court cases.

Can you use the Internet Archive, and let them sort out copyright compliance?

5. Business risk

Which is worse? (a) Your client fails to reach an external resource that you have recommended by linking; or (b) You receive legally enforceable urgent take-down orders for copies that you are distributing. Consider how your use of resources differs from the ethical, legal and business issues in the Megaupload case. You do not want to be distributing a copy of any source document when the original is removed under (threat of) court order. Copyright is not the only issue. Courts have ordered takedowns due to (claims of) defamation, obscenity, privacy, intimidation, vilification, security, blasphemy, holocaust denial, among other things, and some of these determinations involve defendants operating in foreign jurisdictions.

Copyright law is "bad law" in the sense that it is virtually impossible for most citizens to understand and  observe. Of course, that doesn't remove our duty to comply. I don't know that there is a simple solution to this, apart from using material in the way that the copyright owners prefer.

I'm looking forward to hearing better answers in this discussion.

Regards,

Russell

 

Average of ratings: Very cool (2)
In reply to Russell Waldron

Re: Linking to web resources - what happens when they disappear?

by David McCarthy -

Thank you Russell and Derek for such full replies.

I found the content on the dead link which prompted my questions, reproduced in full on the public-facing website of a college in the US, and they did have a pointer back to the dead link.

Our use of that particular article would be inside a Moodle site with no public (guest) access (so, less business risk?).

I had a discussion last year with an archivist (from one of the Oxford colleges) who expressed growing alarm with the fragility and ephemeral nature of information stored online or using 'modern' media. She cited the difficulty of finding equipment which could read 7" computer discs or open reel tapes. This leads to the printing of everything, just in case.

I think the letter of the law in the UK would be that we couldn't reproduce it without permission. Obviously, if a website has disappeared, getting permission is likely to be impossible. Even copying for personal use is probably illegal - although it is/has changed, copying a CD onto tape to listen to in the car, was illegal in the UK.

I'm not sure where this leaves us with our course.

I think we will need a general rule which says there is no general rule. By taking a view of each link or external resource, evaluating it's value and vulnerability, and then deciding how we approach the (assumed) copyright owners, and how we 'deliver' it to students, we may be able to steer a route between ethics and practicality which we're comfortable with.

Perhaps I should record here that we will not violate any copyright ... and then do what is expedient!

Average of ratings: -
In reply to David McCarthy

Re: Linking to web resources - what happens when they disappear?

by Glenys Hanson -

Hi David and everybody,

I often think we teachers go about things in the wrong way. We bat about on the Internet and come across an article or video and think : "Oh, that would be just right for my XXXX class."

What we should be doing is thinking : "I need an article on YYYY for my XXXX class." and then doing a search for YYYY with "Public domain", "Creative commons", "open access"  or "PLOS" tacked on the end. There are even search engines specialised in this.

Another thing is not to bother with the big guys - they usually won't even take the time to reply, but the little guys and gals will and be flattered you asked for permission to use their work.

We could even hand over the research for content to students: sure they'll come up with some dicey stuff but isn't that our job too? To help them learn to recognise the dicey stuff. They won't learn that if they're just spoon fed the good stuff.

Cheers,

Glenys

I'm not sure I'm convinced, but the ideas of Richard Stallman about copyleft certainly make interesting reading.

Average of ratings: Very cool (1)