<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How can I hide my HTML Source?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.extraconnections.co.uk/articles/how-can-i-hide-my-html-source/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.extraconnections.co.uk</link>
	<description>Oracle and Internet Solutions from Chris Hunt</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2011 07:15:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dominic</title>
		<link>http://www.extraconnections.co.uk/articles/how-can-i-hide-my-html-source/comment-page-1#comment-5765</link>
		<dc:creator>Dominic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 16:04:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://extraconnections.co.uk/?page_id=10#comment-5765</guid>
		<description>However, I think that copyright makes sense. What makes no sense is to try to use technology to prevent people to copy your work that is available on the Internet. They try to do that with videos, but it does not really work. It sends the wrong message. People think that if they can defeat the technology, then it&#039;s fine. It isn&#039;t.  

I think the best way is to rely on the standard copyright approach that we use for books, etc.  In the same way as authors and publishers, even though there is no technological constraint, do not use copyrighted work,  web designers and web masters should not use copyrighted material in their web site. Why this approach, which works fine with books, does not work with website material? I think that the only reason is that a different category of people, less respectful of the work of others, design and maintain websites.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>However, I think that copyright makes sense. What makes no sense is to try to use technology to prevent people to copy your work that is available on the Internet. They try to do that with videos, but it does not really work. It sends the wrong message. People think that if they can defeat the technology, then it&#8217;s fine. It isn&#8217;t.  </p>
<p>I think the best way is to rely on the standard copyright approach that we use for books, etc.  In the same way as authors and publishers, even though there is no technological constraint, do not use copyrighted work,  web designers and web masters should not use copyrighted material in their web site. Why this approach, which works fine with books, does not work with website material? I think that the only reason is that a different category of people, less respectful of the work of others, design and maintain websites.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

