arubicus - 7:29 pm on Jan 27, 2006 (gmt 0)

"It's also worth pointing out that the robots meta tag to disable this feature is noarchive."

Yeah, it is also worth pointing out that the feature should be disabled AUTOMATICALLY due to a bigger code called a COPYRIGHT. A copyright automatically implies that the creater/owner has the sole right to the disrtibution/presentation of their material REGARDLESS if distribution information is present.

Somewhere people/entities have created this BACKWARDS thinking. Something like this:

"IF it is in public view that means I can do what I want on MY terms unless the owner opts out using my special code/request."

Hey stupid! I the creator of my material MAKE THE RULES on how I want my stuff distributed. If no rules are presented then the rules of COPYRIGHT are implied. Why is this so hard to understand?

Maybe they get away with it because they have better laywers. Maybe they get away with it because the majority website owners just don't care or care to fight it.

Maybe these people/entities score points in the public eye (or judges) for having "good" intentions. Maybe the score points because they don't seek direct monitary gain. You know what?! IT does not matter what their intention are or if the seek monitary gain. It isn't their stuff unless deemed otherwise by fair use or permission.

Also one other note:

In cached version on Google,Yahoo,MSN...Certain advertisements do not show up or are mistargeted (adsense). People can read my material without my opportunity for financial gain through those ad placements.

[edited by: arubicus at 7:42 pm (utc) on Jan. 27, 2006]