Product Code Database
In the context of the World Wide Web, deep linking is the use of a hyperlink that links to a specific, generally searchable or indexed, piece of web content on a website (e.g. "https://example.com/path/page"), rather than the website's home page (e.g., "https://example.com"). The URL contains all the information needed to point to a particular item. Deep linking is different from mobile deep linking, which refers to directly linking to in-app content using a non-HTTP URI.
However, this is not a fundamental limitation of these technologies. Well-known techniques and libraries such as SWFAddress and UnFocus History Keeper now exist that website creators using Adobe Flash or AJAX can use to provide deep linking to pages within their sites.
At the beginning of 2006, in a case between the search engine Bixee.com and job site Naukri.com, the Delhi High Court in India prohibited Bixee.com from deep linking to Naukri.com.
The most important and widely cited U.S. opinions on deep linking are the Ninth Circuit's rulings in Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp.336 F.3d 811 (9th Cir. 2003). and Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc..487 F.3d 701 (9th Cir. 2007). In both cases, the court exonerated the use of deep linking. In the second of these cases, the court explained (speaking of defendant Google, whom Perfect 10 had also sued) why linking is not a copyright infringement under US law:
Google does not…display a copy of full-size infringing photographic images for purposes of the Copyright Act when Google frames in-line linked images that appear on a user's computer screen. Because Google's computers do not store the photographic images, Google does not have a copy of the images for purposes of the Copyright Act. In other words, Google does not have any "material objects…in which a work is fixed…and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated" and thus cannot communicate a copy. Instead of communicating a copy of the image, Google provides HTML instructions that direct a user's browser to a website publisher's computer that stores the full-size photographic image. Providing these HTML instructions is not equivalent to showing a copy. First, the HTML instructions are lines of text, not a photographic image. Second, HTML instructions do not themselves cause infringing images to appear on the user's computer screen. The HTML merely gives the address of the image to the user's browser. The browser then interacts with the computer that stores the infringing image. It is this interaction that causes an infringing image to appear on the user's computer screen. Google may facilitate the user's access to infringing images. However, such assistance raised only contributory liability issues and does not constitute direct infringement of the copyright owner's display rights. …While in-line linking and framing may cause some computer users to believe they are viewing a single Google webpage, the Copyright Act, unlike the Trademark Act, does not protect a copyright holder against acts that cause consumer confusion.
In December 2006, a Texas court ruled that linking by a motocross website to videos on a Texas-based motocross video production website did not constitute fair use. The court subsequently issued an injunction. This case, SFX Motor Sports Inc. v. Davis, was not published in official reports but is available at 2006 WL 3616983.
In a February 2006 ruling, the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court (Copenhagen) found systematic web crawler, indexing, and deep linking by portal site of real estate site not to conflict with Danish law or the database directive of the European Union. The Court stated that search engines are desirable for the functioning of the Internet and that, when publishing information on the Internet, one must assume and accept that search engines deep link to individual pages of one's website.
|
|
