| 11:17 pm on Aug 28, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole... Doctors have deep pockets, and so are well-worth suing.
Just an opinion, I'm not a lawyer.
| 11:19 pm on Aug 28, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Unless you have written permission to put another site within your frames, do not do it.
| 11:20 pm on Aug 28, 2009 (gmt 0)|
even with some sort of disclaimer? I mean it is 100% obvious that it is not his origonal content, it is very obvious that these are seperate websites, is it because they are contained within my page? I should then set them to open in a seperate browser window?
| 11:28 pm on Aug 28, 2009 (gmt 0)|
also...sorry for double post...
while I have your brilliant minds on tap...
Can i embed youtube vidoes for informational purposes inside my site and can I take exerpts out of publically published research papers and/or wikki's as long as I have a link to their source?
| 1:07 am on Aug 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
If you do not wish your client's website to receive a DCMA (and possibly have their website shut down), serve only original content. Learn a little about copyright and intellectual property laws (your country and any others you hope to do business in). As for youtube...unless that video has an "embed this video" code on the page I wouldn't do it.
| 1:52 am on Aug 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|If you do not wish your client's website to receive a DCMA |
Framing a site is technically not republishing and a DMCA compliant counter-notice could cost the DMCA filer a costly sum of money.
However, there are other implications of framing.
| 3:59 am on Aug 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
It definitely becomes one if the content is shown without the original sites full structure, logos, etc. In the instant case, I still wouldn't do it. One thing to provide links, quite something else to display the other site's contents.
| 4:39 am on Aug 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
so, even if the iframe shows the site in its entirety with scrolling enabled, I am better off just having the links open new tab to save myself the headache? It looks so good in the iframe tho...
| 4:42 am on Aug 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
iframe my pages and get caught and your life will take a bad turn. On top of that, I will be all over your client and you can be sure that they will be calling you and freaking out. If you have a portfolio, I will be looking for other victims and make 'inquiries' if clear evidence is found.
Link to my pages - fine. Frame them on another site and I will consider it theft.
Can't imagine the 'disclaimer' that you would use. "Uh, I don't have actual content, so I'm going to rip off somebody else's by hotlinking their whole page."
The client needs be charged for the creation of original content. (Which is easily enough stolen and rewritten if actually doing the work is too much trouble.)
| 7:42 am on Aug 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
@D_Blackwell: amen! The young whippersnappers always seem to look for shortcuts. Is it because they are lazy or, not going to say 'stupid', or 'not creative enough'?
@incrediBILL: Did a little research. Down here in Texas it appears there are three cases of iframe or framed copyright infringement suits in the works. None have gone to court yet but perhaps that might happen...and with the same results as the i4i suit against MS ala patents regarding bits and pieces found in MS Office. We Texicans tend to shoot first and ask questions later (as I have with a few who wanted to "frame" me over the last 9 years.
OP...do the work with original content. No lazy boy route...but if your CLIENT told you to do it CYA! And, without gilding the lily too much, since you stopped long enough to ASK if okay, you already knew the answer.
| 9:45 am on Aug 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
just to clarify, I have built him a site 20 pages or so thus far with original content, this is simply a link/information page with links to information on chiropractic applications for specific diseases. In this page I wanted to use real life examples and scenarios, thus using other reputable organizations case studies and documentation seemed logical, graphically it looks much better to me to click a link and what you are looking for pops up inline, so there was no thought of theft involved, all credit would be supplied to the original owners and when the <iframe> was populated no section of their website was excluded. I came here because I really didn't know. As I stated this is my first website and a very in depth complicated professional one at that. I appreciate all the helpful comments, my plan is to set the pages up to just link into a new browser window/tab for now. I will host a example of the <iframe> page in a directory with no links going to it and send the link in an email to the companies who own that information requesting a solid answer on if they would tolerate it. To me I don't see it as a horrible thing as it is a link merely for educational use for people that are trying to heal ailments, however judging from the way you guys have reacted it seems my pov is a little off key. Again thank you for all the useful information.
This young "whipper snapper" is not lazy stupid or non creative, I have over 40 hours into this site, I have created pages of original content, written the code, the flash and even created him a new logo and identity. It was merely a question posed to you "old timers" by someone with a mind open enough to learn from those who have YEARS of experience on me.
P.s. Can someone clarify on if I can post limited amounts of quotations from wikkipedia with a source link?
| 10:08 am on Aug 29, 2009 (gmt 0)|
There are some ins and outs on re-using Wikipedia information, but essentially it is available under a "Creative Commons [en.wikipedia.org]" licese.
Check out the "Information for re-users" section here: [wikimediafoundation.org...]
| 2:03 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
@DLMdesign ... comment was not specifically directed at you! Too many young/new web dudes take shortcuts, scrape, infringe, and seem to think it is okay. I generally find such sites relatively light on their own content, dependent upon the content of others. When a site is content rich with original presentation AND offers useful links (without framing) I am more impressed and tend to assign some authority to that site. Just my personal observations.
| 3:05 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
DLMdesign - I second tangor's comments.
We're not trying to 'gun you down' - just looking to give the best opinions that we can. Its not personal, and you seem sincere. The OP raised two separate issues from my view.
1) The phrasing raised flags that you very well may be shortcut guy looking for some 'validation'. Happens all the time here; people that just want to 'borrow a few images' or 'a little text'. Give us all a dollar for every time we've been ripped off and we'd all be retired.
2) What you want(ed) to do is, as you've seen, not selling very well. It remains, as originally described, a very bad idea that will not serve you well IMO.
That said, if you've been doing the work, gathering the raw content from your client, turning it into good website text - then you don't need to frame someone else's site. You have even better options:
1) Create a short keyword spiked intro paragraph that links to the authority site and you can use their content to your advantage and it's all white hat.
2) The right link relationships are a very good thing - so are the right content exchanges. If the two sites aren't competing (and sometimes even if they are), but fit together nicely, then they may even be receptive to custom creating a new page on their site, that you will use as a link target. Develop the right relationships and these can be win-win deals.
As Don Rickles said to Telly Savalas in "Kelly's Heroes":
Crapgame: Then make a DEAL!
Big Joe: What kind of deal?
Crapgame: A DEAL, deal! Maybe the guy's a Republican. "Business is business," right?
| 4:17 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Don't Frame it - scrap it, and then republish it from your site and note it by the words "cache" next to it. Doesn't sound right? Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft do it all day long with the entire web.
| 4:36 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|Don't Frame it - scrap it, and then republish it from your site and note it by the words "cache" next to it. Doesn't sound right? Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft do it all day long with the entire web. |
This conundrum (or is that not quite the right descriptive) merits a name and definition(s) of parameters. The example merits an academic examination - though it clearly skips several steps (or redefines) the logic sequence that I think most people would choose to apply as a practical matter.
| 5:27 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|I will host a example of the <iframe> page in a directory with no links going to it and send the link in an email to the companies who own that information requesting a solid answer on if they would tolerate it. To me I don't see it as a horrible thing as it is a link merely for educational use for people that are trying to heal ailments, however judging from the way you guys have reacted it seems my pov is a little off key. |
Normally when people iframe, it's because they want to use someone else's material on their own site. Just because your framing their site doesn't mean it's not stealing, because it is. I've been just as upset as you are because I would have LOVED to frame certain pages but without their permission it's just theft.
That said, anyone who doesn't want to be framed can put a simple javaascript function on their pages to break out of frames.
| 5:40 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
StoutFiles... serious query (and I'm too lazy to Bing it at the moment)... does the js framebuster work with IFRAMES?
And, if it does, that makes me a tad ticked that I'll have to insert that code into (on one site) 1,700ish pages... which makes my site "java" when I don't use js for anything!
...but if that code does kill iframe use of my content elsewhere I WILL CERTAINLY install it.
| 5:49 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Yes, js framebuster scripts work with all kinds of framing, including iframes. The script asks if the document is being displayed at the "top" of the window. if it isn't, then the whole window gets reloaded with the document now at the top.
Since both regular frames and inline frames are displaying the document in a child of the top window, the script works in both cases.
| 5:49 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Follow up to tangor - Is it bullet proof, i.e., work around(s) the site using the iframe can use to bust the framebuster.?
| 6:13 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I did a little research and even though the content isn't physically copied, I stand corrected in that apparently framing is deemed infringement [bitlaw.com] that would be subject to a DMCA compaint:
|problems can arise if a frame is used to show pages from two web sites at the same time. The use of frames in this way can mislead the viewer of a site as to the creator of its content, possibly raising issues of copyright infringement, passing off, defamation, and trademark infringement, just like the linking situations described above |
Answers the question of this thread rather definitely.
| 6:54 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|Is it bullet proof, i.e., work around(s) the site using the iframe can use to bust the framebuster.? |
No, it's not 100% bulletproof - but a workaround would be extremely complex and take a level of expertise that is way beyond 99.9% of webmasters.
I used to think framebusting was bulletproof, but then for a short period of time a few years back, Yahoo Image Search was actually breaking framebuster scripts. I complained about it as did others, and the frame-breaker breaker script was removed. It was apparently created by an overly energetic engineer who pushed the script live without the knowledge of top managament.
| 7:15 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
@Tedster - I deployed a Yahoo frame buster buster buster server side and it was quite simple. When the script detected the referer was Yahoo Image Search I displayed the following:
"Yahoo Image Search is violating the copyright and integrity of this server. If you wish to view the page, CLICK HERE to continue"
The CLICK HERE link broke the frame and loaded ;)
| 10:17 am on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
you could just give the other sites a ring and explain your set-up. if they don't mind, then go ahead and do it. they might be grateful for the extra traffic.
| 2:06 pm on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Don't frame content.
Take the high road and link to them if their content is good enough.
Have the customer give you content they have rights to, to work with if they want their look and feel for it.
| 8:30 pm on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
The references to apparently simple frame busting scripts, but all lacking examples or acceptable authoritative links struck me as less than fully helpful; missing an opportunity to expand the discussion and possibly suspect for those reasons.
Started to search around for anti frame busting scripts and quickly found enough results that I would take a hard look cracking a frame busting script before using one. Clearly, a lot of iframers don't think much of low level attempts to stop them.
Was also no problem to find discussion about ant anti frame busting. coderrr.wordpress.com [coderrr.wordpress.com]
stackoverflow.com also discusses this subject with what seems to be some degree of sophistication, though much of it is over my head.
What I have taken from these searches is the that busting the frame buster is not that hard - that it takes more effort to bust the bust.
< Moderator Note:
For the above link, we're going to make an exception to our
policy about links to non-authority blog posts Forum Charter [webmasterworld.com])
- but just for the purposes of this discussion alone. >
[edited by: tedster at 9:02 pm (utc) on Aug. 30, 2009]
| 8:59 pm on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|though much of it is over my head |
|Clearly, a lot of iframers don't think much of low level attempts to stop them. |
That is not my experience. The basic frame-breaker stops many would-be framers. An expert burglar can pick the lock on my front door, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to bother having a lock there at all.
| 9:04 pm on Aug 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|And, if it does, that makes me a tad ticked that I'll have to insert that code into (on one site) 1,700ish pages... which makes my site "java" when I don't use js for anything! |
I'd advise you to learn PHP/MySQL and turn those pages from 1,700 to 17.
| 1:32 pm on Aug 31, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|...clarify on if I can post limited amounts of quotations from wikkipedia with a source link? |
I would hardly call Wikipedia a definitive source for anything! How about a quote from a reputable medical association instead.
| This 54 message thread spans 2 pages: 54 (  2 ) > > |