By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
424,949 Members | 1,086 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 424,949 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

How to force a page to be into a frame?

P: n/a
Hello everybody,

I have created a page consisting of two frames. The second frame is
made to display "external" sites (i.e. written not by me, for
example www.google.com). But I found that some "external" pages
(for example www.hotmail.com ) do not "want" to be displayed in my
frame. They take the whole windows. Does anybody know why? Does anybody
know whether this problem can be solved, i.e. whether one can force
sites to be displayed into the fame?

Oct 8 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
11 Replies


P: n/a
op*********@yahoo.com wrote:
I have created a page consisting of two frames. The second
frame is made to display "external" sites (i.e. written not
by me, for example www.google.com). But I found that some
"external" pages (for example www.hotmail.com ) do not
"want" to be displayed in my frame. They take the whole
windows. Does anybody know why?
It is javascript, along the lines of:-

<script type="text/javascript">
if(top != window){
top.location = window.location.href;
}
</script>
Does anybody know whether this problem can be solved,
It is not a problem, it is a reality.
i.e. whether one can
force sites to be displayed into the fame?


There is nothing that the creator of the framing site can do to prevent
any page loaded into a frame from re-loading itself in the main window.

If your users don't want this to happen they can disable scripting in
their browsers.

Richard.
Oct 8 '05 #2

P: n/a
op*********@yahoo.com wrote:

Hello everybody,

I have created a page consisting of two frames. The second frame is
made to display "external" sites (i.e. written not by me, for
example www.google.com). But I found that some "external" pages
(for example www.hotmail.com ) do not "want" to be displayed in my
frame. They take the whole windows. Does anybody know why? Does anybody
know whether this problem can be solved, i.e. whether one can force
sites to be displayed into the fame?


What you are trying to do is display an external Web page contrary
to the way the owner of that page wants it to be displayed. DON'T
DO IT! Have some respect for the creative efforts of a page's
owner.

My own pages are copyrighted. I give a blanket release to anyone
who wants to link to my pages. However, that release requires my
pages do not appear within a frame on someone else's page. If you
display one of my pages in one of your frames, that is a violation
of my copyright, for which I will take whatever legal measures are
necessary to protect.

--

David E. Ross
<URL:http://www.rossde.com/>

I use Mozilla as my Web browser because I want a browser that
complies with Web standards. See <URL:http://www.mozilla.org/>.
Oct 8 '05 #3

P: n/a
> What you are trying to do is display an external Web page contrary
to the way the owner of that page wants it to be displayed. DON'T
DO IT! Have some respect for the creative efforts of a page's
owner.
My own pages are copyrighted. I give a blanket release to anyone
who wants to link to my pages. I never heard that sometimes it is forbidden to link to somebody's
page. Does it mean that if I link to your page without your permission
I break the law and will account for it? What about google? It makes
linkage automatically and there are links on your page in the search
results. Does it mean that you can bring an action against google? By
the way, do we speak about some world-wide law regulating
interrelations in web-space or we speak just about law of USA?
However, that release requires my
pages do not appear within a frame on someone else's page. If you
display one of my pages in one of your frames, that is a violation
of my copyright, for which I will take whatever legal measures are
necessary to protect.

Here is a link on google-page which put your copyrighted page into a
frame. Does google break the low?
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...l%3Den%26lr%3D

Oct 9 '05 #4

P: n/a
> What you are trying to do is display an external Web page contrary
to the way the owner of that page wants it to be displayed. DON'T
DO IT! Have some respect for the creative efforts of a page's
owner.


By the way what about respect for readers/users of the page? Don't
they have a right to decide haw to see pages (with or without my
framing procedure)? If they (users) see a page using there own
background (not with background supplied by creator), does they break
the law? If I give an additional tool bar to user's browsers and they
will see your page with my tool bar will I break your copyright? Why my
frame cannot be considered as an additional tool bar of a browser?

Oct 9 '05 #5

P: n/a
op*********@yahoo.com writes:
frame cannot be considered as an additional tool bar of a browser?


That's not even an ethical or legal question - technically, there are *far*
better ways to add a browser toolbar, that don't muck up navigation, book-
marking, browser history, etc. the way that frames can.

If you want to implement a toolbar, have a look at the plugin API of your
target browser, and use the right tool for the job.

sherm--

--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Hire me! My resume: http://www.dot-app.org
Oct 9 '05 #6

P: n/a
On 9 Oct 2005 02:05:15 -0700, op*********@yahoo.com wrote:
What you are trying to do is display an external Web page contrary
to the way the owner of that page wants it to be displayed. DON'T
DO IT! Have some respect for the creative efforts of a page's
owner.
That isn't quite the point. If you switch off styling in your browser,
or view the page in Lynx, you are quite possibly displaying it contrary
to the way the owner wants the page displayed (at least if the owner is
a deezyner-type) but there is nothing wrong with that. The issue is
taking someone else's material and effectively displaying it within
one's own site.
My own pages are copyrighted. I give a blanket release to anyone
who wants to link to my pages.
I never heard that sometimes it is forbidden to link to somebody's
page. Does it mean that if I link to your page without your permission
I break the law and will account for it?
Being able to link directly to any page of a site is an intrinsic part
of the concept of the World Wide Web. In my opinion, suggesting that
someone needs permission to link to a page is as ridiculous as
suggesting that someone needs permission to reference a particular page
of a book.

Sadly however there are a few benighted companies who think that
everyone who visits their site should come through their main entry page
- the one with the advertisements on it. There have been some court
cases on this, and I believe there have even been one or two
ill-informed judges who have ruled against so-called "deep linking".
However it is possible that in some of these cases the linker was in
fact framing the other site - I haven't tried to disentangle all the
rights and wrongs. As more judges themselves start to use computers, the
risks of silly rulings on this point are diminishing.

AIUI however one of the reasons behind the present trend of free logins
on many news sites is indeed to force readers to go through the "front
page".
What about google? It makes
linkage automatically and there are links on your page in the search
results. Does it mean that you can bring an action against google?
You can always bring an action against anyone. In this case you wouldn't
deserve to succeed though.
By
the way, do we speak about some world-wide law regulating
interrelations in web-space or we speak just about law of USA?
I suspect we are actually talking about the particular judge concerned
and which side of bed he got out of. (Although if you are passing off
other peoples work as your own, that would be prohibited in almost all
countries.)
However, that release requires my
pages do not appear within a frame on someone else's page. If you
display one of my pages in one of your frames, that is a violation
of my copyright, for which I will take whatever legal measures are
necessary to protect.

Here is a link on google-page which put your copyrighted page into a
frame. Does google break the low?
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...l%3Den%26lr%3D


In this case it may do. Try taking Google to court and let us know how
you get on.

--
Stephen Poley

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/
Oct 9 '05 #7

P: n/a
As a general comment to this thread, I would like to draw everyone's
attention to <URL:http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkLaw>.

Thor

--
http://www.anta.net/OH2GDF
Oct 9 '05 #8

P: n/a
Stephen Poley wrote [in part]:

Being able to link directly to any page of a site is an intrinsic part
of the concept of the World Wide Web. In my opinion, suggesting that
someone needs permission to link to a page is as ridiculous as
suggesting that someone needs permission to reference a particular page
of a book.

Sadly however there are a few benighted companies who think that
everyone who visits their site should come through their main entry page
- the one with the advertisements on it. There have been some court
cases on this, and I believe there have even been one or two
ill-informed judges who have ruled against so-called "deep linking".
However it is possible that in some of these cases the linker was in
fact framing the other site - I haven't tried to disentangle all the
rights and wrongs. As more judges themselves start to use computers, the
risks of silly rulings on this point are diminishing.


Copyright law gives me control over the dissemination of what I
created. Web hosts do indeed block access or even delete Web pages
that link to other pages in violation of the copyrights on those
latter pages.

This is not merely a commercial issue restricted to "a few
benighted companies". I have seen copyright notices specifically
denying permission to link other than to top-level pages within a
Web site.

The real issue is that I put time and effort into creating my
pages. I own them. Thus, I have the right to control them. My
own copyright notice grants permission to link to any of my pages
-- PROVIDING you do not do so in a manner that displays my pages
within your frame. When you display one of my pages within your
frame, you create the false impression that my work is actually
part of yours, that you now control my property.

--

David E. Ross
<URL:http://www.rossde.com/>

I use Mozilla as my Web browser because I want a browser that
complies with Web standards. See <URL:http://www.mozilla.org/>.
Oct 9 '05 #9

P: n/a
On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 12:48:07 -0700, David Ross <no****@nowhere.not>
wrote:
Stephen Poley wrote [in part]:

Being able to link directly to any page of a site is an intrinsic part
of the concept of the World Wide Web. In my opinion, suggesting that
someone needs permission to link to a page is as ridiculous as
suggesting that someone needs permission to reference a particular page
of a book.

Sadly however there are a few benighted companies who think that
everyone who visits their site should come through their main entry page
- the one with the advertisements on it. There have been some court
cases on this, and I believe there have even been one or two
ill-informed judges who have ruled against so-called "deep linking".
However it is possible that in some of these cases the linker was in
fact framing the other site - I haven't tried to disentangle all the
rights and wrongs. As more judges themselves start to use computers, the
risks of silly rulings on this point are diminishing.
Copyright law gives me control over the dissemination of what I
created.


Within certain limits, yes. But you do not have the rights to determine
whether other people refer to your material or not.
Web hosts do indeed block access or even delete Web pages
that link to other pages in violation of the copyrights on those
latter pages.
Then they are being silly. But web hosts are not known for understanding
copyright law. There was a test carried out in Holland recently when
someone wrote to about ten different hosts demanding that they remove
copyrighted material. The material was out of copyright, and the
briefest check would have shown it was out of copyright (it was from a
fairly well-known and long-dead author). Horrifyingly, the majority
removed the material without any checks whatever - without even asking
the writer to show that he had any rights in the matter or the
page-author what he thought about it.
This is not merely a commercial issue restricted to "a few
benighted companies". I have seen copyright notices specifically
denying permission to link other than to top-level pages within a
Web site.
Well, maybe it's a lot of benighted companies then.
The real issue is that I put time and effort into creating my
pages. I own them. Thus, I have the right to control them.
But you do *not* have the right to control someone else's reference to
them.

Do you really suppose that if Fred Bloggs publishes a book, he can
prohibit someone else from writing "Fred Bloggs describes widget
manufacture on page 38 of his book 'All About Widgets'"?

Whether the reference to your site takes the form of some text "David
Ross has written on subject X" or the form of an explicit hyperlink
*should* make no difference - in both cases it is just a reference to
your site - though as I mentioned earlier, it appears that some judges
may not understand that point.

My
own copyright notice grants permission to link to any of my pages
-- PROVIDING you do not do so in a manner that displays my pages
within your frame. When you display one of my pages within your
frame, you create the false impression that my work is actually
part of yours, that you now control my property.


Yes, that is a different matter and I'm inclined to agree with you. Will
you be taking legal action against Google?

--
Stephen Poley

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/
Oct 9 '05 #10

P: n/a
Dan
op*********@yahoo.com wrote:
Hello everybody,

I have created a page consisting of two frames. The second frame is
made to display "external" sites (i.e. written not by me, for
example www.google.com). But I found that some "external" pages
(for example www.hotmail.com ) do not "want" to be displayed in my
frame. They take the whole windows. Does anybody know why? Does anybody
know whether this problem can be solved, i.e. whether one can force
sites to be displayed into the fame?


Force doesn't work on the Web.
http://webtips.dan.info/force.html

It sounds like you're trying to get into a war of "dueling scripts",
where your site tries to force somebody else's site into a frame, while
the other site tries to force itself out of your frame. The wishes of
the end user don't figure into this at any point, and his browser may
end up in convulsions as it tries to execute the conflicting scripts of
both sites, unless he has some sense and disables scripting to prevent
it. Most likely he ends up going away from both of your sites.

--
Dan

Oct 9 '05 #11

P: n/a
Stephen Poley wrote:

On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 12:48:07 -0700, David Ross <no****@nowhere.not>
wrote:
Stephen Poley wrote [in part]:

Being able to link directly to any page of a site is an intrinsic part
of the concept of the World Wide Web. In my opinion, suggesting that
someone needs permission to link to a page is as ridiculous as
suggesting that someone needs permission to reference a particular page
of a book.

Sadly however there are a few benighted companies who think that
everyone who visits their site should come through their main entry page
- the one with the advertisements on it. There have been some court
cases on this, and I believe there have even been one or two
ill-informed judges who have ruled against so-called "deep linking".
However it is possible that in some of these cases the linker was in
fact framing the other site - I haven't tried to disentangle all the
rights and wrongs. As more judges themselves start to use computers, the
risks of silly rulings on this point are diminishing.


Copyright law gives me control over the dissemination of what I
created.


Within certain limits, yes. But you do not have the rights to determine
whether other people refer to your material or not.
Web hosts do indeed block access or even delete Web pages
that link to other pages in violation of the copyrights on those
latter pages.


Then they are being silly. But web hosts are not known for understanding
copyright law. There was a test carried out in Holland recently when
someone wrote to about ten different hosts demanding that they remove
copyrighted material. The material was out of copyright, and the
briefest check would have shown it was out of copyright (it was from a
fairly well-known and long-dead author). Horrifyingly, the majority
removed the material without any checks whatever - without even asking
the writer to show that he had any rights in the matter or the
page-author what he thought about it.
This is not merely a commercial issue restricted to "a few
benighted companies". I have seen copyright notices specifically
denying permission to link other than to top-level pages within a
Web site.


Well, maybe it's a lot of benighted companies then.
The real issue is that I put time and effort into creating my
pages. I own them. Thus, I have the right to control them.


But you do *not* have the right to control someone else's reference to
them.

Do you really suppose that if Fred Bloggs publishes a book, he can
prohibit someone else from writing "Fred Bloggs describes widget
manufacture on page 38 of his book 'All About Widgets'"?

Whether the reference to your site takes the form of some text "David
Ross has written on subject X" or the form of an explicit hyperlink
*should* make no difference - in both cases it is just a reference to
your site - though as I mentioned earlier, it appears that some judges
may not understand that point.
My
own copyright notice grants permission to link to any of my pages
-- PROVIDING you do not do so in a manner that displays my pages
within your frame. When you display one of my pages within your
frame, you create the false impression that my work is actually
part of yours, that you now control my property.


Yes, that is a different matter and I'm inclined to agree with you. Will
you be taking legal action against Google?


I don't have to take legal action against Google. Google's placing
of Web pages in frames is limited to when a user searches for an
image. Google provides a means for me to remove my images from its
search index and inhibit its bots from indexing those images in the
future.

My goal is to retain control of my property. If I can accomplish
that without suing, I am satisfied. "Sue the SOB at the drop of a
hat" might be the slogan of some, but it's not my slogan.

--

David E. Ross
<URL:http://www.rossde.com/>

I use Mozilla as my Web browser because I want a browser that
complies with Web standards. See <URL:http://www.mozilla.org/>.
Oct 10 '05 #12

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.