Interesting case (GS Media case) being heard that could have far reaching implications with its rulings…
Interesting read. It’s a bit scary that I wasn’t aware of it before you posted this link.
Looking at it pragmatically, if you click the URL then you land at the “other” information provider and are immediately subjected to the rules being enforced by that site.
- For example, if the URL is pointing to a newspaper’s site and you
haven’t subscribed to that newspaper then, you will possibly not be able read the complete article being pointed to. - Another example: if the URL is pointing to the TV broadcaster and that broadcaster only allows full Internet access from IP addresses within that broadcaster’s country and, you
are currently using an IP address located somewhere else on planet Earth then, you will not be able to view that TV broadcast/clip.
Whether or not the people who attended the University Law Schools understand these points is in its self a moot point. 
Yes, there is a certain amount of common sense involved, but copyright law in particular seems to have trouble with the web and its global nature.
Two variations on this theme:
- URLs can be viewed as being a reference – a pointer:
Books and papers often have a list of references to material which is usually copyrighted. Nobody has an issue with this practice because the copyrighted material usually has to be purchased if the reference is to be verified.
(See the “Chicago Manual of Style” for a guide of how references should be listed: ISBN 978-0-226-10420-1)
- If I go to a kiosk and purchase a magazine or a newspaper because someone recommended that publication to me then, the copyright on the purchased article applies but, the recommendation to purchase that particular publication is not subject to any copyright.