iFrame ettiquette

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Wings, Sep 18, 2005.

  1. Wings

    Wings Guest

    I put a state highway conditions page into my page on hiking, via an iframe,
    as highway conditions were important to our groups bi-weekly hiking trips.
    However, I've been somewhat uncomfortable over this. Just what are the
    ettiquette rules for grabbing someone else's page to enhance your own? One
    part of me says they should be happy for the exposure, but I realize that I
    am using them for my own purposes. Yes, I could link to them. but their page
    works so well with mine. Any comments in this regard? Is there a site
    dedicated to questions like this?

    Thanks in advance.
     
    Wings, Sep 18, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Wings

    Jim Higson Guest

    Wings wrote:

    > I put a state highway conditions page into my page on hiking, via an
    > iframe, as highway conditions were important to our groups bi-weekly
    > hiking trips. However, I've been somewhat uncomfortable over this. Just
    > what are the ettiquette rules for grabbing someone else's page to enhance
    > your own? One part of me says they should be happy for the exposure, but I
    > realize that I am using them for my own purposes. Yes, I could link to
    > them. but their page works so well with mine. Any comments in this regard?
    > Is there a site dedicated to questions like this?


    So long as you aren't passing your content off as theirs, I don't see why
    anyone would mind. If you want to make sure, why not just ask them?
     
    Jim Higson, Sep 18, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Wings

    mbstevens Guest

    Wings wrote:
    > I put a state highway conditions page into my page on hiking, via an iframe,
    > as highway conditions were important to our groups bi-weekly hiking trips.
    > However, I've been somewhat uncomfortable over this. Just what are the
    > ettiquette rules for grabbing someone else's page to enhance your own? One
    > part of me says they should be happy for the exposure, but I realize that I
    > am using them for my own purposes. Yes, I could link to them. but their page
    > works so well with mine. Any comments in this regard? Is there a site
    > dedicated to questions like this?


    I think you should at least ask their permission before framing
    it. An iframe gives the impression that the content is yours.
    Many people even insert JS code into their pages just to keep
    people from framing their content. I've been known to do it.

    And then there's the other issue -- for internet use frames are
    just no good.
    --
    mbstevens
    http://www.mbstevens.com/preprocessor
     
    mbstevens, Sep 18, 2005
    #3
  4. Wings

    Guest

    IMO, as long as you let your viewers know that it's not yours, and tell
    them whose it is, it's fine.
     
    , Sep 18, 2005
    #4
  5. Wings

    PeterMcC Guest

    wrote in
    <>

    > IMO, as long as you let your viewers know that it's not yours, and
    > tell them whose it is, it's fine.


    There have been a couple of similar responses and I'd caution against acting
    on that basis without getting qualified advice.

    --
    PeterMcC
    If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
    inappropriate or offensive in any way,
    please ignore it and accept my apologies.
     
    PeterMcC, Sep 18, 2005
    #5
  6. Wings

    SpaceGirl Guest

    PeterMcC wrote:
    > wrote in
    > <>
    >
    >>IMO, as long as you let your viewers know that it's not yours, and
    >>tell them whose it is, it's fine.

    >
    >
    > There have been a couple of similar responses and I'd caution against acting
    > on that basis without getting qualified advice.
    >


    Who says the advice in here isn't qualified? :)

    I'd go with getting permission. And I AM qualified :p


    --


    x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

    # lead designer @ http://www.dhnewmedia.com #
    # remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #
    # this post (c) Miranda Thomas 2005
    # explicitly no permission given to Forum4Designers
    # to duplicate this post.
     
    SpaceGirl, Sep 18, 2005
    #6
  7. Wings

    Morgan Guest

    Wings wrote:
    > I put a state highway conditions page into my page on hiking, via an iframe,
    > as highway conditions were important to our groups bi-weekly hiking trips.
    > However, I've been somewhat uncomfortable over this. Just what are the
    > ettiquette rules for grabbing someone else's page to enhance your own? One
    > part of me says they should be happy for the exposure, but I realize that I
    > am using them for my own purposes. Yes, I could link to them. but their page
    > works so well with mine. Any comments in this regard? Is there a site
    > dedicated to questions like this?
    >
    > Thanks in advance.


    In legal terms, there is a concept called fair use which applies to
    internet content/copyright.

    Basically if you use the information for a non-profit purpose you're
    ok. If however you use the information that isn't your content in a
    profit context of any kind you could be sued, even if you just copied a
    simple gif image from the site.

    (In which case ask them, and then if they don't give it, you'll have to
    make up your own content.)

    See this link for more info on it.

    http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/copypol2.htm
     
    Morgan, Sep 18, 2005
    #7
  8. Wings

    JDS Guest

    On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 16:10:46 +0100, Jim Higson wrote:

    > So long as you aren't passing your content off as theirs, I don't see why
    > anyone would mind. If you want to make sure, why not just ask them?


    How about the fact that he is using their bandwidth as his own? Even these
    days, bandwidth still costs money

    --
    JDS |
    | http://www.newtnotes.com
    DJMBS | http://newtnotes.com/doctor-jeff-master-brainsurgeon/
     
    JDS, Sep 19, 2005
    #8
  9. Wings

    Jim Higson Guest

    JDS wrote:

    > On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 16:10:46 +0100, Jim Higson wrote:
    >
    >> So long as you aren't passing your content off as theirs, I don't see why
    >> anyone would mind. If you want to make sure, why not just ask them?

    >
    > How about the fact that he is using their bandwidth as his own? Even these
    > days, bandwidth still costs money


    I said "So long as you aren't passing your content off as theirs". Anyway,
    the question is mute - just ask if they mind.

    Jim
     
    Jim Higson, Sep 19, 2005
    #9
  10. Wings

    Morgan Guest

    >How about the fact that he is using their bandwidth as his own? Even these
    >days, bandwidth still costs money.


    Excellent point. The site owners are unlikely to be happy about this
    if they are paying for their brandwidth.
     
    Morgan, Sep 19, 2005
    #10
  11. On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Morgan wrote:

    > >How about the fact that he is using their bandwidth as his own? Even these
    > >days, bandwidth still costs money.

    >
    > Excellent point. The site owners are unlikely to be happy about this
    > if they are paying for their brandwidth.


    Check past discussion for "bandwidth leeches". I've only felt the need to
    do this once, and that was for an image that was being called out many
    thousands of times by a page in the far east - so much so that this one
    URL showed up as a peak in the entire server statistics!

    But I surmise it can work for frames too.

    There are measures that the victim can take, based on the Referer(sic)
    header. While of course there's no guarantee that the Referer header will
    be present (so, the victim has to allow the item to be served out if it's
    missing), if that header is present then it'll mostly be the truth, so if
    it doesn't match one's own site then something else can be served out in
    its place (an HTTP error[1], or a rude picture, whatever - it's limited
    only by one's imagination). Once this is in place, there's little point
    in the offender continuing to call it out - a few of their visitors will
    see the right thing, but most of them will get the error (or the rude
    picture, whatever). The victim's own pages, of course, still work just
    fine.

    [1] 410 if you want to be protocol-correct ;-)
     
    Alan J. Flavell, Sep 19, 2005
    #11
  12. Wings

    Wings Guest

    Thanks to everyone who replied. I'm going to take the suggestion to just ask
    them. I'll post the reply here if there's anything in it of interest.

    To those who think this is bandwidth theft, I can't agree, and is the reason
    I didn't just ask in the first case. We aren't, for example, just stealing
    an image without the site content. We're displaying the site, and after all,
    the site is there because they want people to see it - so whether they come
    through me to get to his provider, or directly, is a mute point as to
    bandwidth use. I.e., I previously had a link to them and my users would go
    there and use the bandwidth anyhow.

    As for objections against using iFrames, I hear you., but I'm not that good
    at this and haven't a clue as to how else one would go about doing it. But
    the question is rather mute as the site is for the use of a group of about
    15 people only - it isn't a commercial site - and none of them have any
    problems at the page. I think we're all microsoft serfs (grin).

    "Morgan" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Wings wrote:
    >> I put a state highway conditions page into my page on hiking, via an
    >> iframe,
    >> as highway conditions were important to our groups bi-weekly hiking
    >> trips.
    >> However, I've been somewhat uncomfortable over this. Just what are the
    >> ettiquette rules for grabbing someone else's page to enhance your own?
    >> One
    >> part of me says they should be happy for the exposure, but I realize that
    >> I
    >> am using them for my own purposes. Yes, I could link to them. but their
    >> page
    >> works so well with mine. Any comments in this regard? Is there a site
    >> dedicated to questions like this?
    >>
    >> Thanks in advance.

    >
    > In legal terms, there is a concept called fair use which applies to
    > internet content/copyright.
    >
    > Basically if you use the information for a non-profit purpose you're
    > ok. If however you use the information that isn't your content in a
    > profit context of any kind you could be sued, even if you just copied a
    > simple gif image from the site.
    >
    > (In which case ask them, and then if they don't give it, you'll have to
    > make up your own content.)
    >
    > See this link for more info on it.
    >
    > http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/copypol2.htm
    >
     
    Wings, Sep 19, 2005
    #12
  13. Wings wrote:

    > ... is a mute point ...


    I've seen this phrase twice in the last couple of minutes.

    It is a *moot* point.

    --
    -bts
    -This space intentionally left blank.
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Sep 19, 2005
    #13
  14. Wings

    Els Guest

    Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

    > Wings wrote:
    >
    >> ... is a mute point ...

    >
    > I've seen this phrase twice in the last couple of minutes.
    >
    > It is a *moot* point.


    <g>

    --
    Els http://locusmeus.com/
    Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
    - Renato Russo -
    Now playing: Status Quo - ROADHOUSE - Roadhouse Blues - The Wanderer
    - Marguerita Time - Living On An Island - Break The Rules
     
    Els, Sep 19, 2005
    #14
  15. Wings

    Neredbojias Guest

    With neither quill nor qualm, Beauregard T. Shagnasty quothed:

    > Wings wrote:
    >
    > > ... is a mute point ...

    >
    > I've seen this phrase twice in the last couple of minutes.
    >
    > It is a *moot* point.


    Ya, das ist goot.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.
     
    Neredbojias, Sep 19, 2005
    #15
  16. Wings

    Els Guest

    Neredbojias wrote:

    > With neither quill nor qualm, Beauregard T. Shagnasty quothed:
    >
    >> Wings wrote:
    >>
    >>> ... is a mute point ...

    >>
    >> I've seen this phrase twice in the last couple of minutes.
    >>
    >> It is a *moot* point.

    >
    > Ya, das ist goot.


    While we're on a correction spree; that should be "Ja, daß ist gut."
    (and if that character doesn't work: "dass ist gut")

    --
    Els http://locusmeus.com/
    Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
    - Renato Russo -
    Now playing: Sweet - Little Willy
     
    Els, Sep 19, 2005
    #16
  17. On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Els wrote:

    > Neredbojias wrote:
    >
    > > Ya, das ist goot.

    >
    > While we're on a correction spree; that should be "Ja, daß ist gut."
    > (and if that character doesn't work: "dass ist gut")


    Thereby proving the usenet rule that every spelling correction will
    contain at least one spelling error.

    bon soir
     
    Alan J. Flavell, Sep 19, 2005
    #17
  18. Wings

    Neredbojias Guest

    With neither quill nor qualm, Els quothed:

    > Neredbojias wrote:
    >
    > > With neither quill nor qualm, Beauregard T. Shagnasty quothed:
    > >
    > >> Wings wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> ... is a mute point ...
    > >>
    > >> I've seen this phrase twice in the last couple of minutes.
    > >>
    > >> It is a *moot* point.

    > >
    > > Ya, das ist goot.

    >
    > While we're on a correction spree; that should be "Ja, daß ist gut."
    > (and if that character doesn't work: "dass ist gut")


    Well, excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuusssse me!

    Besides, I was typing phonetically.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.
     
    Neredbojias, Sep 20, 2005
    #18
  19. All of you got it wrong.

    It should be:

    Yo, dat be good.

    I'm talkin' bout talkin' good etiquette here.
     
    X l e c t r i c, Sep 20, 2005
    #19
  20. Wings

    Wings Guest

    Holy sweepstakes! You are correct! I want the head of that linguistically
    challenged ape who led me astray!

    "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <> wrote in message
    news:zIEXe.69138$...
    > Wings wrote:
    >
    >> ... is a mute point ...

    >
    > I've seen this phrase twice in the last couple of minutes.
    >
    > It is a *moot* point.
    >
    > --
    > -bts
    > -This space intentionally left blank.
     
    Wings, Sep 20, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    686
  2. mi
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    13,649
    dorayme
    May 21, 2008
  3. elca
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    580
  4. Chris Pine

    ettiquette question

    Chris Pine, Apr 15, 2005, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    267
    Chris Pine
    Apr 19, 2005
  5. Daedalous
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    713
    Daedalous
    Jan 16, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page