4 ms·

Does this apply to google bots and other spiders/crawlers?

Animats 10y ago
It would if you sent Google a cease and desist notice. But Google seems to obey "robots.txt", so you usually don't have to.
- steve19 10y ago
  1. register lots of domains 2. send Google cryptic cease and desist for each domain 3. wait for Google to accidently violate cease and desist 4. profit What can possibly go wrong?
  - argonaut 10y ago
    The judge, a human who possesses common sense, sees you've registered lots of domains and spammed C&D letters to Google, calls you out on your BS, and orders you to pay Google's legal fees?
    - kuschku 10y ago
      So, find a Judge in east texas?
      - argonaut 10y ago
        Wrong issue. That's for patent lawsuits.
        kuschku 10y ago
        Well, it was more in jest, but the argument I wanted to make was that there will be a judge allowing that. Remember Scientology's SeaOrg suing thousands of IRS employees and the IRS? Those weren't thrown out either.
        ceejayoz 10y ago
        > the argument I wanted to make was that there will be a judge allowing that. This argument only works if the system doesn't have the ability to appeal.
  - _nalply 10y ago
    In Switzerland this would be «manifest abuse of a right». https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19070042/index.html#a2 https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19070042/... (art. 2 paragraph 2 of Swiss Civil Code: Acting in good faith). This is a common standard in many jurisdictions and an important element of the rule of law, so I think that in the US, if law is done right, a judge will identify such behaviour as abuse.
  - slavik81 10y ago
    CFAA: "Whoever having knowingly accessed a computer without authorization..." I am not a lawyer, but accidentally violating the cease and desist would clearly not be a breach of the CFAA. And in any case, civil suites are designed to compensate you for damages. If Google's acts caused you no harm, then you wouldn't get anything even if they were in the wrong.
- morekozhambu 10y ago
  Hmm. Is having 'robots.txt' a requirement. What if one just changes the terms and conditions page? Can the bot figure out it just committed a crime?
  - chii 10y ago
    If you yelled at a deaf person to go away, are you surprised that they don't comply?
    - gm-conspiracy 10y ago
      If I am facing them, and they can read lips, then yes.
  - erroneousfunk 10y ago
    robots.txt has no legal standing by itself, but is a convenient way to translate "terms of service" (which do have legal meanings, but they're often more limited than people assume) into something that bots can automatically understand. You're under no legal obligation to follow robots.txt, but it's a tool to prevent stepping on toes.
    - Animats 10y ago
      The "robots.txt" file has figured in two copyright cases.[1] Courts have taken notice of it as an indication of the web site operators's intent. [1] http://www.law360.com/articles/497068/the-role-of-the-robot-exclusion-in-copyright-defenses http://www.law360.com/articles/497068/the-role-of-the-robot-...

It would if you sent Google a cease and desist notice. But Google seems to obey "robots.txt", so you usually don't have to.

steve19 10y ago
1. register lots of domains 2. send Google cryptic cease and desist for each domain 3. wait for Google to accidently violate cease and desist 4. profit What can possibly go wrong?
- argonaut 10y ago
  The judge, a human who possesses common sense, sees you've registered lots of domains and spammed C&D letters to Google, calls you out on your BS, and orders you to pay Google's legal fees?
  - kuschku 10y ago
    So, find a Judge in east texas?
    - argonaut 10y ago
      Wrong issue. That's for patent lawsuits.
      - kuschku 10y ago
        Well, it was more in jest, but the argument I wanted to make was that there will be a judge allowing that. Remember Scientology's SeaOrg suing thousands of IRS employees and the IRS? Those weren't thrown out either.
        ceejayoz 10y ago
        > the argument I wanted to make was that there will be a judge allowing that. This argument only works if the system doesn't have the ability to appeal.
- _nalply 10y ago
  In Switzerland this would be «manifest abuse of a right». https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19070042/index.html#a2 https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19070042/... (art. 2 paragraph 2 of Swiss Civil Code: Acting in good faith). This is a common standard in many jurisdictions and an important element of the rule of law, so I think that in the US, if law is done right, a judge will identify such behaviour as abuse.
- slavik81 10y ago
  CFAA: "Whoever having knowingly accessed a computer without authorization..." I am not a lawyer, but accidentally violating the cease and desist would clearly not be a breach of the CFAA. And in any case, civil suites are designed to compensate you for damages. If Google's acts caused you no harm, then you wouldn't get anything even if they were in the wrong.
morekozhambu 10y ago
Hmm. Is having 'robots.txt' a requirement. What if one just changes the terms and conditions page? Can the bot figure out it just committed a crime?
- chii 10y ago
  If you yelled at a deaf person to go away, are you surprised that they don't comply?
  - gm-conspiracy 10y ago
    If I am facing them, and they can read lips, then yes.
- erroneousfunk 10y ago
  robots.txt has no legal standing by itself, but is a convenient way to translate "terms of service" (which do have legal meanings, but they're often more limited than people assume) into something that bots can automatically understand. You're under no legal obligation to follow robots.txt, but it's a tool to prevent stepping on toes.
  - Animats 10y ago
    The "robots.txt" file has figured in two copyright cases.[1] Courts have taken notice of it as an indication of the web site operators's intent. [1] http://www.law360.com/articles/497068/the-role-of-the-robot-exclusion-in-copyright-defenses http://www.law360.com/articles/497068/the-role-of-the-robot-...