

ACM censors linking - amichail
http://realtimecollisiondetection.net/blog/?p=101

======
swaroop
Got an email reply from the ACM folks:

The issue here is copyright, not censorship. All of the author versions that
were linked to on these pages are still available -- ACM explicitly grants
individual authors the right to post their own versions of their papers on
their own pages. All ACM bibliographic data, and tables of contents in the DL,
are available without cost to anyone in the world. If you want the copy of a
SIGGRAPH paper and an author has posted it, you can still access it without an
ACM subscription. Also note there would be no problem with these pages if they
linked to the ACM version of the papers. Other lists of papers, compilations
that Ke-Sen Huang built (rather than copying the table of contents from a
publication) are not affected. Furthermore, the SIGAsia2009 pages Ke-Sen Huang
makes available are still there until the papers are available in the ACM DL
in the interest of promoting the conference.

The copyright issue that applies is described in this link:

[http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Li...](http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Links)

" ACM treats links as citations (references to objects) rather than as
incorporations (embedding of objects). Permission is not needed to create
links to citations in The Portal (ACM Digital Library or Online Guide to
Computing Literature). ACM encourages the widespread distribution of links to
the definitive versions of its copyrighted works in the ACM Digital Library
and does not require that authors obtain prior permission to include such
links in their new works.

However, someone who creates a work or a service whose pattern of links
substantially duplicates a copyrighted work should get prior permission from
the copyright holder. One example: the creator of "A Table of Contents for the
Current Issue of TODS" -- consisting of citations and active links to author-
versions of the works in the latest issue of TODS -- needs ACM permission
because that creator is reproducing an ACM-copyrighted work. If all the links
in the "Table of Contents" pointed to the ACM-held definitive versions, ACM
would normally give permission because then the new work advertises an ACM
work. To avoid misunderstandings, consult with ACM before duplicating an ACM
work via links."

------
jasonwatkinspdx
The ACM does have a reasonable legal argument that his pages duplicate the
TOC. Collections/indexes of information are copyrightable so long as they so a
minimal amount of creative discretion in their contents.

That said, I think it's clear the ACM's stance in attempting to limit and
profit from the dissemination of its journals will ensure it is surpassed by
other publication forums eventually.

~~~
jrockway
Copyright does not prevent you from independently building a set of data that
someone else has already built, it merely protects against copying their set
verbatim.

~~~
chancho
Right but the ACM is the ultimate source of the data. They own the conference,
the paper selection processes and hence the list of papers. It's hard to argue
that this list was compiled without _ever_ looking at the ACM's list. It's a
grey area for sure, and you could argue that if you go to the conference and
simply observe the presenters and their paper titles, or even just ask the
authors "Did you get a siggraph paper in? What was the title?" then that is
_your_ data, but by the same logic I can go to the World Series and live-blog
a play-by-play account of the game, which would surely get me sued. (Maybe
people do this I don't know I don't follow sports, but I know that the leagues
claim copyright over accounts and descriptions, regardless of whether they
actually have those rights.)

~~~
jasonwatkinspdx
Going to the world series of poker is slightly different as there's
potentially a contract established between you and the promoters via your
ticket.

~~~
chancho
I haven't been to siggraph, but for $1,175 (
<http://www.siggraph.org/s2010/for_attendees/registration> ) there's surely a
potential for a contract between you and the ACM via your conference
registration.

Also, copyright holders don't need to enter into a contract to assert their
rights. You don't enter into a contract when you watch TV but you still don't
get the right copy and distribute shows (or sporting events) that you watch.

~~~
jrockway
_you still don't get the right copy and distribute shows (or sporting events)
that you watch_

But you can make a page that links to the network's website where the TV shows
are downloadable for free.

------
amichail
See discussion here:
[http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/a6tsm/acm_censo...](http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/a6tsm/acm_censoring_linking_to_publically_available/)

------
blahedo
Ok, I'm as anti-censorship as the next guy, but do we actually know _why_ the
ACM publications board requested their removal?

~~~
scott_s
Take a look at the pages that are still up (which are for non-ACM
conferences). They are a list of the proceedings, with links to freely
available copies of all of the papers. Presumably, these papers are on the
authors' websites.

Note that the ACM copyright form explicitly _allows_ authors to put up a copy
of their published paper on their own website. So, from what I can surmise,
they requested he take down links to material that is freely and legally
available.

~~~
blahedo
Ah, I see. That does sound like the logical conclusion (and is just as icky as
the poster suggests). But I'd still like to hear what basis ACM is using to,
ah, "request" that the links be taken down.

