Quote:
Originally Posted by popper
hmm , i find this rather odd, the BBC will respond and defend the DrWho trademark and copyright, but so far, not a peep about the long standing BBC "webwise" trademark and copyright....
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/...-from-the-web/
"...
“We note that you are supplying DR WHO items, and using trade marks and copyright owned by BBC.
You have not been given permission to use the DR WHO brand and we ask that you remove from your site any designs connected with DR WHO.
Please reply acknowledging receipt of this email, and confirm that you will remove the DR WHO items as requested.â€Â
...
" |
They responded to me a month or so ago, and they don't have Webwise copyrighted.
---------- Post added at 07:33 ---------- Previous post was at 07:27 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff
They only specified Google but I presume they were just being flippant. I expect if there is anything at all representing permission to spider to anyone, they will use that as implied consent.
Alexander Hanff
|
I'm waiting for a BT answer to that specific point, following up their reply to someone else (which I have seen) - where it did appear from their reply that they were talking about Google.The reply was specific enough to make me think in terms of contacting Google if I get similar confirmation because it could mean webmasters singling out google for a disallow while allowing other search engines.
It's possible that the spokesperson was simply confused, as they don't get on well with very specific questions about how Phorm/Webwise works - but the answer seemed clear enough even if it was wrong.