Fencing Cyberspace: Drawing Borders in a Virtual World Maureen A
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Minnesota Law Review 1998 Fencing Cyberspace: Drawing Borders in a Virtual World Maureen A. O'Rourke Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation O'Rourke, Maureen A., "Fencing Cyberspace: Drawing Borders in a Virtual World" (1998). Minnesota Law Review. 1923. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr/1923 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Minnesota Law Review collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Fencing Cyberspace: Drawing Borders in a Virtual World Maureen A. O'Rourke* Introduction ............................................................................... 610 I. An Introduction to the Internet and the World W ide W eb .................................................................. 615 A. Origins of the Internet ................................................... 615 B. Development of the World Wide Web ........................... 619 C. Emergence of the Internet as a Commercial Marketplace ............................................... 624 1. Development of the Marketplace .............................. 624 2. Web Business Models ................................................ 625 a. Advertising-Based Models ................................... 626 b. Subscription-Based Models .................................. 627 c. Cybershopping ...................................................... 627 d. Emerging Web Revenue Models .......................... 629 II. Navigating the Net Through Linking-The Technical Aspects and the Legal Challenges ..................................... 630 A. Types of Linking ............................................................. 631 B. The Legal Challenges to Linking .................................. 634 1. The Ticketmaster v. Microsoft Case: The IHREF Link ......................................................... 634 2. The Washington Post v. Total News Case: The "Frame" ............................................................... 637 3. Discerning Litigation Trends ................................... 639 III. Policy Considerations-Debating the Appropriate Legal Rule for Linking ........................................................ 640 * Associate Professor of Law, Boston University School of Law (BUSL); B.S., Marist College; J.D., Yale Law School. Thanks to Bob Bone, Ron Cass, David Dana, Dan Freehling, Jane Ginsburg, Wendy Gordon, Keith Hylton, Mark Lemley, Fran Miller, Rob Merges, James Molloy, Pamela Samuelson, Michael Schmelzer, David Seipp, the BUSL Copy Center and Library staffs, my research assistant Kim Schmitt, and my family. Thanks also to all of the participants at the BUSL and Notre Dame Law School faculty workshops at which this paper was presented. 609 MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 82:609 A. Arguments for a Strong Property Rights Regime in Cyberspace .................................................... 640 B. Custom as a Source of Law-Netiquette ...................... 641 C. Technological Considerations ........................................ 645 D. First Amendment Concerns .......................................... 647 E. Putting the Policy Together-A Limited Property Right to Link ................................................................... 649 IV. Public Law Implications of Linking-The Uneasy Fit Between Copyright and Trademark ............................ 654 A. The Copyright Law of Linking ...................................... 655 1. The HREF Link .......................................................... 658 2. The Fram e ................................................................... 662 B. Trademark Implications of Linking .............................. 670 1. Trademark Dilution .................................................. 672 2. Unfair Competition ................................................... 676 3. Trademark Infringement .......................................... 681 C. A Recap: Putting Copyright and Trademark Law Together on the Internet ............................................... 684 V. Much Ado About Nothing? Will Contract and Misappropriation Law Replace Intellectual Property Law on the Internet? ......................... .................. 686 A. On-Line Contracting: The Ultimate Shrinkwrap? ...... 687 B. Misappropriation-The Limits of the "Hot News" Doctrine ...................................................... 697 VI. The "Zoning" of the Internet .............................................. 701 Conclusion .................................................................................. 704 INTRODUCTION In the last few years, the Internet has increasingly become a source of information even for the historically computer illit- erate.' The growing popularity of the Internet has been driven in large part by the World Wide Web (web). The web is a system that facilitates use of the Internet by helping users sort through 1. See generally Dan L. Burk, Trademarks Along the Infobahn: A First Look at the Emerging Law of Cybermarks, 1 U. RICH. J.L. & TEcH. 1, 68 (Apr. 10, 1995) <http'/www.urich.edu/-jolt/vlil/burkhtm> (noting that "the recent and burgeoning influx of computer neophytes," while decreasing the level of sophistication of the average user, has also made the Internet an at- tractive commercial marketplace); Victoria Slind-Flor, If It's Online, Why Pay?, NAT'L L.J., Nov. 18, 1996, at Al (citing an attorney who notes that the Internet is increasingly "used by many people who are even technophobes"). 1998] FENCING CYBERSPACE the great mass of information available on it.2 The web uses software that allows one document to link to and access an- other, and so on, despite the fact that the documents may reside on different machines in physically remote locations. The disper- sion of data that is the Internet is thus largely overcome by the web's ability to link related information in a manner transparent to the user. This has helped to make the Internet into a me- dium of mass communication and a vast commercial market- place. The distinction between the virtual space on which Inter- net information seems to reside, the physical location in which it actually resides, and the physical space from which the user accesses it has given rise to a new body of thought-provoking legal scholarship.4 This scholarship, still at a formative stage, discusses how law should-or should not-be applied in a world that seems to lack the physical territorial boundaries 2. See infra note 43. 3. Although the Internet and the web are not synonymous, "[to most users and businesses, the World Wide Web ... is the Internet." ABA, WEB LINKING AGREEMENTS: CONTRACTING STRATEGIES AND MODEL PROVISIONS 1 (1997) [hereinafter WEB LINKING AGREEMENTS]. Cyberspace is a "shorthand way of referring to computer communications generally," including not just the Internet but also online services. I. Trotter Hardy, Property (and Copy- right) in Cyberspace, 1996 U. CH. LEGAL F. 217, 217. While the terms do have different meanings, unless the context indicates otherwise, this Article uses "cyberspace," "Internet," and the "web" interchangably. 4. See, e.g., BORDERS IN GYBERSPACE (Brian Kahin & Charles Nesson eds., 1997) (collecting articles regarding a variety of Internet issues); Frank H. Easterbrook, Cyberspace and the Law of the Horse, 1996 U. CI. LEGAL F. 207, 210-14 (suggesting that legislative changes may be inadvisable to deal with cyberspace problems because technology is moving forward so quickly and contending that a better approach would be to enable bargains, in part by creating property rights to make bargains possible and creating bargaining institutions); I. Trotter Hardy, The ProperLegal Regime for "Cyberspace," 55 U. PITT. L. REV. 993 (1994) (discussing how to decide when cyberspace issues present new legal problems and suggesting a presumption of decentralization in rulemaking); Hardy, supra note 3, at 236-60 (arguing that a private prop- erty regime is appropriate in cyberspace); David R. Johnson & David Post, Law And Borders-The Rise of Law in Cyberspace, 48 STAN. L. REV. 1367, 1367-68 (1996) (arguing that territorial boundaries break down in cyberspace and that law will emerge for the cyberspace community to deal with the lack of physical borders); Henry H. Perritt, Jr., Property and Innovation in the Global InformationInfrastructure, 1996 U. Cm. LEGAL F. 261, 263 (discussing challenges for Internet information providers and arguing that existing law with a few changes is sufficient); see also Lawrence Lessig, The Zones Of Cy- berspace, 48 STAN. L. REV. 1403, 1403 (1996) (discussing Johnson & Post's work cited supra and stating that, while their work is important, the distinc- tion between "real space law and cyberspace law... can[not] yet be sus- tained"). 612 MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 82:609 that historically have justified government's use of its regulatory and judicial powers.5 This discussion is particularly timely be- cause a recent flurry of litigation' strongly suggests that there is, at best, a lack of understanding as to what law governs the In- ternet and, at worst, broad disagreement as to what that law is. In some respects, however, it is quite remarkable that this discussion is only now occurring. The scientific and educa- tional communities have used the Internet for almost thirty years,' yet it is only recently