On Sun, 25 Apr 1999, Martin Hamilton wrote:
> FYI we're in the process of negotiating a revised SLA which has a
> built-in loophole: the JISC/ACN can make special exceptions to most of
> the SLA requirements. Hopefully the same thing will be in HENSA's SLA
> for the JANET Mirror Service (Kick Out The JAMS, anyone? :-), so we
> should soon be in a position to maximise our synergies ;-)
>
> The general problem with rewriting content before delivering it to
> people is that if done on a large scale/regular basis/for the
> community as a whole, it's likely to result in us being sued by the
> content providers! There's a world of difference between this and
> simply caching the stuff which people ask us for.
I'm not sure I understand where your first paragraph is leading but I
agree strongly with your last sentence. IMHO, a cache is a cache - it has
no business modifying the content it delivers *unless* end-users can
knowingly opt-in to such a value-added 'service' and can opt-out when they
don't require it. As has previously been pointed out, many (perhaps most)
end-users of the JWCS do not currently have these options.
Andy.
--
UK Office for Library and Information Networking
University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK Voice: +44 1225 323933
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell/ Fax: +44 1225 826838
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|