Why is this iframe not loading?

Is it a copyright violation if a third-party high content resource website is loaded in an <iframe> in my website?

• For example, I load many Quora pages into an <iframe>s in my website, is it a violation? I am still loading the whole pages of other websites !

• Answer:

  I completely agree with  "this is an unclear/legal grey area, so be careful" analysis, but would like to expand on a couple of points.  Here are the three main possible areas of concern when framing third-party content: 1) If framing prohibitions appear in the "Terms of Use" it is clearly a violation of the website's copyright policies - but may or may not be a violation of law. In fact, many websites include "you may not frame this website" statements in the copyright policy sections of their site's terms of use (For the first random examples I Googled up, see: http://www.johnsonbank.com/terms-of-use and https://www.identifix.com/corp/terms_of_use.asp). That said, it's a grey area as far as whether violation of a site's terms of use constitutes a criminal violation.  (See EFF's discussion/work on this issue here: http://www.eff.org/issues/terms-of-abuse) Edited to Add: Seeing as the question description specifically refers to Quora, I would point out that Quora's Terms of Use do not prohibit framing, and do provide for broad licenses to repost material - provided certain guidelines are met.   2) Unauthorized framing of a site is a copyright violation if you can consider the end result a "derivative work." This is the legal justification that disallows you from "in-lining" (e.g., using img src= links referencing a content owner's site in order to display copyrighted images on your site.) Even though you are not "copying" the content (since you are referring to the webpage hosted by the copyright owner), the full web page (your framed page + the external framed page) could be viewed as an unauthorized modification of the copyrighted/linked site.  In fact, one court ruling found exactly that: Futuredontics Inc. v. Applied Anagramic Inc., 45 U.S.P.Q. 2d 2005 (C.D. Cal. 1998). Again, this is a grey area depending on the context and nature of the frame structure, and whether a judge would consider the site with frames to be a derivative work. 3) If you don't clearly delineate and attribute the content of the copyrighted/framed site, the framing could constitute "passing off/reverse passing off" -- which is a trademark violation. If the frames are used to either make your site content look like it belongs to the linked site -- or to make the linked site content look like it belongs to you -- and, if the linked site proves that reputation/goodwill/monetary damage occurred, this could be grounds for legal action. In one case, The Washington Post , CNN and others sued a  website called Total News that framed their content, on the grounds of trademark dilution, noting that it would confuse users into believing the Total News ad content was, in fact, created by the source newspaper. This case was settled without a court opinion, but Total News agreed to stop framing and to only use text-only links. Again, this is a grey area, depending on the context and nature of the frame structure.