
If you can still get to the joke from down below, you're good.
The person who "owns" the blog I pointed to got on AIM and demanded that I take the link down. She said that if she wanted to distribute it, she would of done it herself, and I had no permission to link to such public information.
Gee, haven't I heard about this before?
Oh yes. On Slashdot. There's reports from 1999 about Universial suing over links, trying to make it copyright infringement, as well as two Singapore ISP's butting heads against each other. One in 2000 about the RIAA also making linking copyright infringement. A 2001 report about the BBB suing a for-profit site over linking (and developing anti-deep-linking tech, a point in BBB's favor*). One in 2003 in which a German court has ruled that a well-working Internet and World Wide Web takes precidence of commercial intrests -- that if a user knows the URL, then just linking to the URL is just a simplification of typing it in.
So what does this mean? I'm within my legal rights to keep the post up, and any lawsuit against me will likely fail. And since I think the joke is funny, I'm keeping the post.
Now, if this person who complained was slightly more intelegent, she would of had to restrict viewing to those who know her very well.... or not post it at all.
* A note on the BBB of technical nature: All the BBB needs to do, and it's something Geocities, Lycos, KeenSpace, VCL, alot of companies do in the Apache web server is check the "Referer:" header to see if it's someone we like. Besides, it's not like I have a date-stamped log of the IP address you're on when you look up Stalag '99. Those "privacy firewalls" are just a joke.