Contents
Example
This link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_linking is an example of a deep link. The URL contains all the information needed to point to a particular item, in this case the Wikipedia English article on deep linking, instead of the Wikipedia home page at http://www.wikipedia.org/.
When a web site is visited, the browser first downloads the textual content in the form of an HTML document. The downloaded HTML document may call for other HTML and/or stylesheet files to be processed. These files may contain <img> tags which supply the URLs which allow images to display on the page. The HTML code generally does not specify a server, meaning that the web browser should use the same server as the parent code (<img src="picture.jpg" />). It also permits absolute URLs that refer to images hosted on other servers (<img src="http://www.example.com/picture.jpg" />).
When a browser downloads an HTML page containing such an image, the browser will contact the isolated server to request the image content.
Deep Linking and the HTTP Protocol
The technology behind the World Wide Web, the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), does not actually point out any dissimilarity between "deep" links and any other links-all links are functionally alike. This is intentional; one of the designed purposes of the Web is to allow authors to link to any published document on another site. The opportunity of so-called "deep" linking is therefore built into the Web technology of HTTP and URLs by default-while deep links can be attempted by a site to restrict deep links, to do so calls for extra effort. According to the World Wide Web Consortium Technical Architecture Group, "any attempt to forbid the practice of deep linking is based on a misunderstanding of the technology, and threatens to weaken the functioning of the Web as a whole".
Usage
Some commercial websites object to other sites making deep links into their content either because it bypasses advertising on their main pages, passes off their content as that of the linker or, like The Wall Street Journal, they charge users for permanently-valid links. Sometimes, legal actions results from deep linking such as in the 1997 case of Ticketmaster versus Microsoft, where Microsoft deep-linked to Ticketmaster's site from its Sidewalk service. This case was settled when Microsoft and Ticketmaster arranged a licencing agreement. Ticketmaster later filed a similar case against Tickets.com, and the judge in this case ruled that such linking was legal as long as it was clear to whom the linked pages belonged.[2] The court also concluded that URL's themselves was not copyrightable, writing: "A URL is merely an address, open to the public, like the street address of a building, which, if known, can facilitate the user to reach the building. There is nothing adequately original to make the URL a copyrightable item, chiefly the way it is used. There appear to be no cases holding the URLs to be subject to copyright. On principle, they should not be."
Deep Linking and Rich Web Technologies
Deep linking is not supported by websites which are built on rich web technologies such as Adobe Flash and AJAX. This can result in usability difficulties for people visiting such websites. For example, visitors to these websites may be unable to save bookmarks to individual pages or states of the site, web browser forward and back buttons may not work as expected, and use of the browser's refresh button may return the user to the initial page.
However, this is not a fundamental drawback of these technologies. Well-known techniques now exists that website creators using Flash or AJAX can use to provide deep linking to pages within their sites.
Criticism
Many critics charge that such sites simply want to establish policies that will "license" such links to the highest bidder. They squabble that links are a fundamental part of "user-oriented" web browsing. Probably the earliest legal case arising out of deep-linking was the 1996 Scottish case of Shetland Times vs. Shetland News where the Times accused the News of appropriating stories on the Times' website as its own.
Critics say that the term 'deep linking' is pointless: hyperlinking was always anticipated to refer to pages other than a publisher's front page, making deep linking nothing other than hyperlinking.
Some people who find no fault with deep linking do find fault with inline linking, the act of using media from an additional website directly within one's own website. It causes browsers to request the media directly from the original web server, using the creator's network bandwidth without any benefit to them.
Court rulings
In the beginning of 2006 in a case between the search engine Bixee.com and job site Naukri.com, the Delhi High Court in India prohibited Bixee.com from deeplinking to Naukri.com.
In December of 2006, a Texas court ruled that linking by a motocross website to videos on a Texas-based motocross video production website did not constitute fair use. The court consequently issued a restriction. [6]. The WestLaw citation for this case (not freely available) is 2006 WL 745161.
In a February 2006-ruling, the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court (Copenhagen) found systematic crawling, indexing and deeplinking by portal site ofir.dk of real estate site Home.dk not to conflict with Danish law or the database edict of the European Union. The Court even stated that search engines are desirable for the functioning of the Internet of today. And that one, when publishing information on the Internet, must assume-and accept-that search engines deep link to individual pages of one's website.
Opt out
Web site owners wishing to prevent search engines from deep linking are able to use the existing Robots Exclusion Standard (/robots.txt file) to specify their desire or otherwise for their content to be indexed. Some feel that content owners who fail to provide a /robots.txt file are implying that they do not object to deep linking either by search engines or others who might link to their content. Others believe that content owners may be uninformed of the Robots Exclusion Standard or may not use robots.txt for other reasons. Deep linking is also accomplished outside the search engine context, so some participating in this debate question the relevance of the Robots Exclusion Standard to controversies about Deep Linking. The Robots Exclusion Standard does not programmatically enforce its commands so it does not prevent search engines and others who do not follow graciousness conventions from deep linking.
Seo Study
SEO Services