Bots being legally protected as a class or not, using robots.txt as the ultimate test of what distinguishes normal traffic from CFAA violations is a very flawed

Bots being legally protected as a class or not, using robots.txt as the ultimate test of what distinguishes normal traffic from CFAA violations is a very flawed mechanism. It turns your website into a minefield. As a property owner, a no-trespassing sign won't protect you from the lawsuits that result when a toddler drowns in your pool. You're expected to do more (like putting up that gate). Equifax's systems are peppered with "no-trespassing" motds at login. They also have a robots.txt file. We expected them to do more. Same for leaving keys in your ignition, guns unlocked on your nightstand, etc. "Don't touch" signs won't absolve you of responsibility when either gets stolen and used in a spree killing. So yes, as the owner of any sort of asset, in most contexts it is your responsibility to implement access controls to keep unauthorized traffic out.