In 1990, a scientist at the European Lab for Particle Research (CERN)—Tim Berners-Lee—developed the medium you're reading this column on. The idea was to provide a means to link documents from across the globe together in one accessible format.

But now, with the Web in the mainstream, linking has caused some problems. It seems some don't like the idea. This summer has seen the first of what's sure to be many legal battles over the A HREF tag.

• A German is brought up on criminal charges for linking to a contentious article in Radikal magazine
• Ticketmaster is suing Microsoft's listings guide, Sidewalk because of the software giant linked directly to event pages on the ticket giants site
• The modern-day sheriffs of Nottingham are on a global hunt to stop people from posting, or even linking to, a document known as the JET report, which investigated alleged Satanic rituals involving children

If these cases succeed, the precedents they could establish are chilling to imagine. For example, how many links would separate "good" links from "bad" ones? One level? Two? Five? This is especially of concern for journalists.

The online news media covered all of the above cases. Most linked to the questionable sites. Does that make them party to the misdeed? Traditional media often relies on leaked documents to break news stories, and it is an accepted method. These cases suggested the practice is not as accepted in the online world. The JET report was "leaked" by three investigative journalists from England, but their actions have landed them in court.

Most analysts feel that the cases are weak, and will not succeed in court. The online media seems to have agreed by linking, or in some cases mirroring, the documents in question. The consensus in the net.journalism community says that linking is as important a tool to us, as video is to television reporters. Linking provides the story with a context that other media cannot provide.

Not only can reporters link to their primary sources, they can also use search engines—or their publications archives—to include previous articles relevant to the issue being discussed. It's akin to the last few paragraphs in a newspaper article. Quality links can often enrich a story better than any graphics or sounds enhancements.

And there lies another trick in the linking game. What to link to? If a reporter writes an article about Microsoft's channel definition format (CDF), is it enough to link just to http://www.microsoft.com/? Most net.journalists would say no. Why not go that extra step and link directly to http://www.microsoft.com/sitebuilder where the details on the CDF standard are located.

Because one can link, does not always mean one should. A story mentioning Bell telephones in passing probably doesn't warrant a link to Bell Canada.

Email links, or mailtos, are fading from new media articles as more and more users come online. In the "good ole days" (c. 1993-1994) it was common to read an article with people's email addresses embedded within the story itself. But that was before a URL was slapped on everything from ads to pop bottles. To use old media as an example again, phone numbers are not included after a sources name and nor should a source's email address be included in new media journalism.

Besides, inclusion of an email adress within an article is usually redundant since that same address is usually available on the source's Web site.

Note that I did say sources, because all bylines should have a mailto link, if only to a general delivery box. In the online world, journalist must be accessible to their audience, and to potential sources.

As new media grows into its own, it has begun to reach a consensus through listservs, email exchanges and precedent. But new problems do emerge, as illustrated by this summers spat of legal threats. These cases, if anything, have help online journalism develop, by forcing us to think about what it means to link.