The Internet

Internet law over the past months reminds us of 1970's pop icon Roseanne Roseannadanna's catchphrase, "It's always something." Just when a consensus on basic questions began to emerge, new cases changed the rules. Consider "deep hyperlinking", a link to a page within a website, rather than its homepage (for example, a link directly to this column, for example, rather than our home page).

A 1997 dispute was settled privately, without resolving the issue, when a Microsoft travel site stopped deep links directly to event ordering pages at Ticketmaster's site.

Two recent cases have again challenged deep hyperlinks. In one case, a film studio tried to stop a list of links directly to promotional film clips, rather than the movie sites themselves. In another, Ticketmaster again complained about links to its sales pages, now from a ticket clearinghouse.

Opposition

Many sponsors oppose any links that bypass home page advertising. But some marketers instead see them as keys to highly targeted ads to consumers who have revealed their preferences by visiting a particular web page.

Practically, software can block deep hyperlinks with "home-page only" access software, usually requiring registration and passwords. However, many dislike providing such personal information. Even more, the Internet culture has traditionally been based upon free linking from site to site.

Net Law

Legally, should the site owner be able to control how its site's copyrights are viewed? Should "Net law" recognize an inalienable right to links because of their unique nature, overriding traditional copyright and trademark law?

Of course, money lies behind this dispute. What site operator doesn't want more traffic, whether from an "authorized" link or not? The answer: operators that are paid to favor certain links.

Many web businesses negotiate hundreds of linking agreements, with referral fees and advertising support. The American Bar Association has even published a linking agreement manual.

For now, cautious webmasters should "ask before you link", to avoid aggravation. Today's unquestioned copyright law lets site owners control their content. Since copyright law didn't bend for radio, television or movies, why should it make a fundamental change for the Net?

Online jurisdiction - where you can be hauled into court over a website - has also become unsettled. The emerging, "flexible" rule allows suits only where a site has actual activity, such as paid subscribers or a distribution warehouse. Online displays or catalogs alone are not enough.

However, AOL sued a Texas subscriber in Virginia over an allegedly offensive newsgroup posting, solely because of the use of AOL's Virginia servers. With AOL's massive market penetration, could we all soon be sued in Virginia as well?

New York also tried to shut down an offshore casino - illegal in New York - because the site created a "virtual casino" in the user's New York residence. But how is that different than any website I access from my house? Couldn't any website operator or business be sued anywhere, on the same tenuous theories used in these cases?

Outcome

Finally, the domain name hullabaloo may have finally yielded savings for Net users. Despite claims of high prices and inconsistent service, no alternatives existed to Network Solutions' monopoly. Despite announced plans for competition, several firms have begun registering names at the same price of $70 that let Network Solutions earn massive profits and go public.

But give market forces time. In early August, a German registrar cut its two-year price to $43.50. While no one had matched this price by this column's deadline, perhaps businesses working on Internet time will have offered a range of services and prices by the time you read this.

In fact, Network Solutions has already offered an enhanced service for $119, which the German firm has offered at NSI's current $70 price. The additional service lets users find a site by its common name, rather than a true web address.

If only Net law cases would remain good law as least as long as the fleeting life of the technology they try to regulate!

For help with your Internet and technology law questions, please contact Mr. Jaskiewicz by email at digitallaw@technologist.com, by phone at 215-241-8866, by fax at 215-241-8844, or by mail at Spector Gadon & Rosen, P.C., 1635 Market Street, 7th Fl., Philadelphia., PA 19103. You may review other articles by him at his firm's website at http://www.lawsgr.com.

Stanley P. Jaskiewicz, Esquire, Spector Gadon & Rosen, P.C., 1635 Market Street, 7th Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19103; Voice 215-241-8866; Fax 215-241-8844; Unencrypted Email digitallaw@technologist.com