Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

google will lose, and I'm surprised they are even trying. hiQ v. LinkedIn already settled this: scraping public web pages isn’t “unauthorized access,” even if the site says no via robots.txt or ToS. Those aren’t locks.




In Germany, this was also already ruled lawful by the highest court (in the context of plane ticket prices scraping).

reply


HiQ lost on appeal, Microsoft won

reply


No, it's more complicated than that: https://www.morganlewis.com/blogs/sourcingatmorganlewis/2022...

The short answer is that scraping isn't a CFAA offence but might be a terms and conditions violation, depending on the specifics of the access.

reply


Incorrect. OP's view is present day 9th Circuit precedent.

reply




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: