3 ms·
There's no double standard. In the case of crawling and scraping their site the terms are available in the robots.txt file. And Google abide by the robots.txt t
by MarkMc 10y ago
There's no double standard. In the case of crawling and scraping their site the terms are available in the robots.txt file. And Google abide by the robots.txt terms of other websites.
I'm not sure why you dislike this 'appropriated by lawyers' outcome: For web crawling look at robots.txt, for other uses look at the Terms link on the homepage. If you don't agree to the terms then stop accessing the website. Seems straightforward and fair to me.
- croon 10y agoYeah, you're right in response to my comment. It was a bad example. But while google.com (for example) has a robots.txt, you could argue that it's not exactly fair nor inviting disruption. For example whitelisting twitter and facebook for images (subsequently blacklisting everything else). While I won't cry too much foul, I get the feeling that Google entered the stage when internet was quite a bit more wild west (for good and bad) and then the internet changed, partly by them and partly by other actors. For at least some markets I believe it's almost impossible to get a footing now as a new actor, as it's only available to (what is basically) cartels. Email being another one, as you can be locked out of gmail.com or outlook.com communication with basically no discourse if you run your own email server.