Not according to copyright law. Just because you have a computer (with a browser) doesn't give you the right to do what you want with someone else's content.
Unless it's for fair use, you can't photocopy your textbook, for example. I think you may just be learning about the nuances of intellectual property for the first time.
The answer is yes, you are allowed to scribble in a book you own and tear out pages. The answer does not depend on the "type of book" or any copyright licenses.
According to US law, I am also allowed to make copies for personal use, and several other "fair use" cases, absolutely regardless of licenses.
Precisely. Simply owning a book doesn't mean "I can do anything I want to it".
The same applies to copyright material online - just because you own a computer doesn't mean you own the intellectual property on it. You're free to scribble on your computer case though.
Whoever owns the copyright for the page content doesn't own the copyright for the ads. They are separate works. If I have a copyrighted work that says "please insert an ad from Google here" I am under no obligation to do so.
Copyright includes exclusive rights to determine use and distribution of a work of art. That means copyright owners may determining how their work is distributed, including requiring the bundling with other approved works for combined consumption.
Sure, but drive-by contracts are not enforceable. You'd have to present me with the terms of use and let me agree to them before showing me the content.
Copyright itself isn't a contractual agreement, even though a SaaS TOS may lay out copyright agreements. Websites typically list their copyright publicly, and claiming negligence (typically) isn't considered a valid defense to infringement.
Copyright is a limitation on distributing a work, not on receiving one. Copyright has no bearing on me after I get a work, as long as I don't distribute it to anyone else.
A law does not establish if something is really immoral. And until people with dollar signs in their eyes don't have all the sway in making those calls I reserve the right to resist.
Once you send information out into the world. you DONT own it. Real ownership is the ability to exert control over something. Divulged information cannot be controlled by the original source.
So resist by not visiting those sites. Once you say that you are still entitled to the content, you have lost any claim to moral high ground, and are just acting like an entitled child.
"Once you send information out into the world. you DONT own it."
This sounds like someone who believes that if something comes up in a Google image search, it's free game for anyone to use.
Oh I don't feel entitled to it at all. But If I send you a GET request and you will just send it to me now questions asked then I'm going to ask for it. Nice try.
Your variation of the old "if you don't like it why don't you just move" argument is the more childish response.
Besides, enforcing this intellectual property racket is paid for by my tax dollars. Lets call those "contributions" to the
cause my dues.
"This sounds like someone who believes that if something comes up in a Google image search, it's free game for anyone to use."
Exactly. You imply that it is written in stone that ip is a sacred thing. Not everyone agrees.
Not according to copyright law. Just because you have a computer (with a browser) doesn't give you the right to do what you want with someone else's content.