Assuming disallow-all, and some research on robots.txt in Geminispace (Was: Re: robots.txt for Gemini formalised)

[Krixano]

> *But* by putting things on the web, the creator has granted the
world some implied license.

This is not true. The only implied license is to view
the thing put online. Redistributing it is not implied by putting
something online, and neither is modifying, unless it's
under Fair Use (a transformative work).

Christian Seibold

Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Thursday, November 26th, 2020 at 4:18 AM, marc <marcx2 at welz.org.za> wrote:

> Hello Christian
>
> > One more thing I want to point out... copyright law isn't opt-in. It's opt-out.
> >
> > If you don't have a copyright statement or any other licensing information,
> >
> > then "all rights reserved" is automatically assumed, afaik. You can't just copy
> >
> > something just because the author didn't explicitly disallow you from doing that.
>
> Yes - copyright legislation hasn't been repealed :-)
>
> But by putting things on the web, the creator has granted the
>
> world some implied license. The convention which has evolved for
>
> the web is that without a robots.txt forbidding it, crawlers
>
> are free to index and cache, and some other things too. The
>
> boundaries of this are fuzzy, because the conditions weren't
>
> stated at the outset.
>
> But gemini isn't the web, and gemini is new, so maybe we can
>
> do better and not rely on an implied license (all humans may
>
> visit this capsule), and then a robots.txt for just one single
>
> bit of extra information (autonomous software can crawl it too,
>
> if not forbidden).
>
> So many thoughtful people are hesitant to put their data
>
> online - they fear that this may disadvantage them in
>
> future - maybe they worry about employer discrimination, doxxing
>
> or biometric harvesting (from facial detail to writing style)
>
> or things not yet invented.
>
> Given that everybody has different tolerances, a mechanism
>
> whereby people can state their preferences would be a good
>
> thing.
>
> Blindly copying the web robots.txt mechanism seems to be too
>
> coarse/too vague, and too easily decoupled.
>
> regards
>
> marc
>
> -- CC-SA