3 ms·

Sure, but the question was about legality, not ability. Of course there are ways to reliably circumvent some laws. Some laws are stupid. Sometimes those two int

Sure, but the question was about legality, not ability. Of course there are ways to reliably circumvent some laws. Some laws are stupid. Sometimes those two intersect. But those serve only to answer questions about indictment risk and whether something should be legal, not whether or not it is.

fulafel 8y ago
Legal rephrasing: Is there a reason that as a user of a user-agent like Firefox you would be in a legally different position than as a user of this user-agent app?
- moarcoffee 8y ago
  Yes, because your intent is to circumvent the provided mechanisms of the Instagram API and you’re doing it with a program instead of just browsing around the site with the intent of using it like a normal user who isn’t scraping. “But the program did the exact same thing that a human could do!” is a really good, pedantic CS argument, but it’s a terrible legal argument.
  - tacotime 8y ago
    You're being down-voted, and I disagree with your use of the word pedantic here, but I believe your answer is mostly correct. "Browse wrapped" usage agreements are very real and enforceable under certain conditions. At best this is presently a legal gray area. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browse_wrap#Summary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browse_wrap#Summary Remember, anyone can sue you for anything and it is then your burden to defend yourself if they are persistent and wealthy enough.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]