Thursday, October 21, 2004

More about Furl

How embarrassed am I that I didn't even notice that Furl caches the pages you save until recently? I already thought it was a wonderfully useful tool, but apparently missed about half the point of it all.

Here is also an excellent article by Amy Gahran about Furl and copyright infringement - since Furl does save a local version of each page you furl, there's been some concern that publishers will consider their content to have been republished, and take issue. As far as I'm concerned it's on the same level as Google's caching system - which has, as Gahran points out, been gently bumped around in the legal system a bit as well. Perhaps, though, the difference might be that Google actively requires page caching in order for the search engine to work - whereas Furl offers it as a stand-alone feature, but the service itself does not (AFAIK) need caching.

Now that Furl and are catching on, how long before they start to be abused by spammers just like blog comments and Google searches? When will we see the top line on Furl: "Make money fast! furled by 4818 members"? You know somebody's going to try.


Post a Comment

<< Home