[OT]: Who owns the robots.txt "protocol?"

[Scott Elcomb]

Did I miss something, or is it just in the wording?

>From the Official Google Blog:

"This is the third and last in my series of blog posts about the
Robots Exclusion Protocol (REP). In the first post, I introduced
robots.txt and the robots META tags, giving an overview of when to use
them. In the second post, I shared some examples of what you can do
with the REP. Today, I'll introduce two new features that we have
recently added to the protocol."

http://tinyurl.com/35dksy
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/07/robots-exclusion-protocol-now-with-even.html

In particular, it's the last line that bugs me.  I've been a long time
fan of Google, and use many of their services, but lately they've been
reaching in ways (as others have noted) that make me think twice.

In that regards, did Google somehow acquire "management rights" over
the REP, or is this just "microsoftism?"

-- 
Scott Elcomb  [ http://www.psema4.com/ ]

"Our Founders' faith in the viability of representative democracy
rested on their trust in the wisdom of a well-informed citizenry,
their ingenious design for checks and balances, and their belief that
the rule of reason is the natural sovereign of a free people." - Al
Gore (The Assault on Reason, 2008)

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."  - Benjamin Franklin

'"A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting
on its shoes."  - Mark Twain
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists