That would be a horrible precedent. Sending an http request to a server should not trigger copyright violation. This is similar to newspapers who claimed that having links to their site, violates copyright.
That would be a horrible precedent. Sending an http request to a server should not trigger copyright violation. This is similar to newspapers who claimed that having links to their site, violates copyright.
I believe this is why the GPL uses the term "derivative".
> This is similar to newspapers who claimed that having links to their site, violates copyright.
Making links to their site might violate the license by which they allow you to browse their site, but it doesn't break copyright. If the on their homepage had a pop-up "You must agree not to not share any links found on this site as a condition of using this site" that would be analogous.
No newspaper has claimed that ever to the best of my knowledge, and it would make absolutely no sense to. What's being criticized is so-called "rich linking", ie. previewing content such as Wikipedia articles from search engines or news articles from aggregators without taking viewers to the primary source/site. People having a radical anti-copyright agenda have conveniently named this "rich linking" to dilute the discussion, as have news aggregators to downplay the issue.
As an aside, the way the EU copyright reform is being formulated into national law in Germany has been criticized as outright contrary to the whole purpose of the reform, and coming straight from pro-Google lobbyists [1].
[1]: https://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/eu-urheberrechtsrefor... (in German)