An interesting discussion. And, as I think about it carefully, I think Taylor may be technically correct. The fact that a person makes a website publicly available does not mean that have placed that information (artwork, whatever) in the "public domain."
Given that it would still be protected under the copyright laws (but of which nation ... there's a question for you .... nation of the author or artist, or nation of the server on which it is hosted??), then it would be subject to fair use (but again ... fair use under the laws of which nation??).
Fair use does not (in general ... I live in the US, so I tend to think in terms of US law) allow for the use of an entire work for commercial gain ... and I would think that caching an entire website in order to promote certain advertising would be in violation of fair use. I doubt that the fact that there is advertising on the search results page, where only snippets of each website are shown, would be a violation ... but the issue of caching itself is thornier.
In addition, what if the author chooses to remove the artwork or text from the net altogether. In that case, should people still be able to search for it? Recover the entire site?
I fear that the technology is too far ahead of the law in this case ... and the fact that we're talking about something that is international adds layer upon layer to the complexity of the argument.
My brain is doing back flips over the number of issues involved. All I can say is there are valid points on both sides of every issue I can think of.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, I'm trying out the Google browser, and so far I rather like it. It seems fast and it's easy to organize things with it. I think the one thing I would need to have working with it to really like it would be Roboform .... however, knowing those guys, they will fix that pretty soon.
And .... I just got a call .... I'm expected at a party. Well, of course ... and I'm covered with paint. This should be fun.
