Ticket Master law suit regarding "deep linking"... - GoFuckYourself.com

Sly_RJ · 10-23-2003, 03:10 PM

Couple years back Ticket Master filed some law suits against a website or two. Basically, Site A was linking directly to a concert information page on Ticket Master. Ticket Master was pissed because if the surfer goes directly to the concert page, they miss all the ads on the front and various other pages. I'm pretty sure they lost the suit, but really not sure.

In another thread, basschick mentions that ACACIA considers infringement to be even the simple act of linking to a page with video on it.

Could these two cases be similar in any way? Does anyone even remember the Ticket Master case?

The hyperlink patent case also comes to mind...

Scootermuze · 10-23-2003, 03:47 PM

Did Acacia say that even linking to a site that had video infringed on their patent, or was this another exageration being spread by the nay-sayers?

According to Acacia's answer man.. They go after the company that is the actual source of the video, and the company's "affiliates" .. not to be mistaken with the term as is used in. "webmaster affiliates", but rather as used in the legal sense of being involved in the ownership of that business.

This was pretty much how he summed it up in the interview with him on the radio show a couple or so months ago..

But.. maybe that has changed if they are throwing letters out to anyone with a name and address..

Sly_RJ · 10-23-2003, 03:51 PM

Seeing as everyone and their brother is getting a letter, I really don't care what Berman said. Trust a lawyer? Yeh, right.

10-23-2003, 03:10 PM	#1
Sly_RJ Live Hard - Die Hard Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Ready to leave... Posts: 17,042	Ticket Master law suit regarding "deep linking"... Couple years back Ticket Master filed some law suits against a website or two. Basically, Site A was linking directly to a concert information page on Ticket Master. Ticket Master was pissed because if the surfer goes directly to the concert page, they miss all the ads on the front and various other pages. I'm pretty sure they lost the suit, but really not sure. In another thread, basschick mentions that ACACIA considers infringement to be even the simple act of linking to a page with video on it. Could these two cases be similar in any way? Does anyone even remember the Ticket Master case? The hyperlink patent case also comes to mind... __________________ PHAT SERVERS - Quality dedicated hosting at a quality price! sly AT phatservers DOT com - 147479144

10-23-2003, 03:51 PM	#3
Sly_RJ Live Hard - Die Hard Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Ready to leave... Posts: 17,042	Seeing as everyone and their brother is getting a letter, I really don't care what Berman said. Trust a lawyer? Yeh, right. __________________ PHAT SERVERS - Quality dedicated hosting at a quality price! sly AT phatservers DOT com - 147479144

10-23-2003, 03:47 PM	#2
Scootermuze Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 4,513	Did Acacia say that even linking to a site that had video infringed on their patent, or was this another exageration being spread by the nay-sayers? According to Acacia's answer man.. They go after the company that is the actual source of the video, and the company's "affiliates" .. not to be mistaken with the term as is used in. "webmaster affiliates", but rather as used in the legal sense of being involved in the ownership of that business. This was pretty much how he summed it up in the interview with him on the radio show a couple or so months ago.. But.. maybe that has changed if they are throwing letters out to anyone with a name and address..