> Either way, when you’re reading a linked page, you may still
> be “at” awesomestuff.com, as clicking the back button on
> your browser can instantly confirm. Effectively,
> awesomestuff.com has stolen content from newyorker.com, just
> as the compiler of “Most Thoughtful Essays” stole content
> from me.
"At" is the wrong word. The browser is requesting content. If it's requesting content from awesomestuff.com that only newyorker.com has permission to copy, that's a copyright problem.
This is a very odd metaphor for a journalist to mistake. It's as if any reference they make in a piece is violating the copyright of the referenced item. Is reference that difficult of a concept to grasp?
"At" is the wrong word. The browser is requesting content. If it's requesting content from awesomestuff.com that only newyorker.com has permission to copy, that's a copyright problem.
This is a very odd metaphor for a journalist to mistake. It's as if any reference they make in a piece is violating the copyright of the referenced item. Is reference that difficult of a concept to grasp?