From: Cory Doctorow <doctorow@craphound.com>
Date: Thu Jun 27, 2002  03:57:27  PM US/Pacific
To: ombudsman@npr.org
Subject: NPR's linking policy redux

Dear Mr. Dvorkin,

I am writing to renew my disappointment with NPR's new linking policy.
While this policy may be superficially more "open" than its predecessor, it
continues to promulgate harmful fallacies in the guise of upholding
journalistic integrity.

Most of the policy deals with what sorts of links are "allowed." This
section is wholly redundant.

	* Prosecuting someone who fraudulently "suggest(s) that NPR
	  promotes or endorses any third party's causes, ideas, Web
	  sites, products or services" doesn't require a linking
	  policy; the existing statutes are more than sufficient for
	  any remedy that NPR might seek.
	
	* As to "using NPR content for inappropriate commercial
	  purposes," I am mystified. Surely there are *unlawful* uses
	  that third parties might make of NPR's material, and, as
	  with misrepresentation, a linking policy is a pointless
	  adjunct to those protections already afforded by the law in
	  those cases.
	
	* "Inappropriate uses," though, sounds awfully vague. Is the
	  word "inappropriate" meant to encompass those uses that are
	  both lawful and impolite? Is it NPR's belief that its
	  audience can be compelled to contract out of its fair use
	  rights to make unauthorized, even impolite uses of NPR's
	  material?

Finally, we come to the most pernicious piece: "We reserve the right to
withdraw permission for any link."

You can't withdraw that which you did not extend. I don't need your
permission to link to your site. The absence or presence of your permission
is irrelevant. There is no intellectual property interest in controlling
the contexts in which your work may be referenced.

This is the single most harmful misrepresentation you can make about the
Web. As Tim Berners-Lee wrote:

	"The ability to refer to a document (or a person or anything
	 else) is in general a fundamental right of free speech to the
	 same extent that speech is free. Making the reference with a
	 hypertext link is more efficient but changes nothing else...
	
	"Users and information providers and lawyers have to share
	 this convention. If they do not, people will be frightened
	 to make links for fear of legal implications. I received a
	 mail message asking for 'permission' to link to our site. I
	 refused as I insisted that permission was not needed.
	
	"There is no reason to have to ask before making a link to
	 another site."
	
	(http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkMyths.html)
	
A link is a public fact: *This* story exists *there.* The role of copyright
in our society does not extend to granting authors control over the
contexts in which the existence of their work may be noted.

However, NPR is a respected news-agency. When it takes the position that
permission to link can be extended and revoked, it creates a climate of
uncertainty among NPR's audience who use the Web. NPR is failing its
commitment to journalistic ethics in promoting this harmful myth. It is
misleading its stakeholders and betraying their trust in NPR's integrity.

Those audience members who understand the true facts of linking lose
respect daily for NPR. Those who do not are led farther and farther astray
by a trusted source of information.

You owe your listeners and readers better than this. NPR should immediately
withdraw this policy in its entirety and formally retract any statements
that implied the necessity of permission before linking, and so serve its
journalistic mission.

Thank you,


Cory Doctorow
--
Cory Doctorow
doctorow@craphound.com http://www.craphound.com

Blog: http://boingboing.net