Content deleted Content added
Updating URL's. |
|||
Line 1:
{{Notability|date=July 2011}}
'''Automated Content Access Protocol''' ("ACAP") was proposed in 2006 as a method of providing machine-readable permissions information for content, in the hope that it would have allowed automated processes (such as search-engine web crawling) to be compliant with publishers' policies without the need for human interpretation of legal terms. ACAP was developed by organisations that claimed to represent sections of the publishing industry ([[World Association of Newspapers]], [[European Publishers Council]], [[International Publishers Association]]).<ref>[http://www.the-acap.org/FAQs.aspx#FAQ10 ACAP FAQ: Where is the driving force behind ACAP?]</ref> It was intended to provide support for more sophisticated online publishing business models, but was criticised for being biased towards the fears of publishers who see search and aggregation as a threat<ref name="douglas">
==Status==
Line 25:
==Comment and debate==
The project has generated considerable online debate, in the search<ref>[http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060922-104102 Search Engine Watch article]</ref>, content<ref>[http://shore.com/commentary/newsanal/items/2006/200601002publishdrm.html Shore.com article about ACAP]</ref> and intellectual property<ref>[http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=408&res=1280_ff&print=0 IP Watch article about ACAP]</ref> communities. If there are linking themes to the commentary, they are that keeping the specification simple will be critical to its successful implementation, and that the aims of the project are focussed on the needs of publishers, rather than readers. Many have seen this as a flaw.<ref name="douglas"/><ref>
== See Also ==
| |||