4 ms·

> I don't understand this argument. Twitter hasn't tricked anyone. They have an enforceable terms of use agreement with their users. If you deliberately circumv

> I don't understand this argument. Twitter hasn't tricked anyone. They have an enforceable terms of use agreement with their users. If you deliberately circumvent controls described by that agreement, they have civil recourse. It's their site and always has been. That's actually not true, if it's public information, then you're free to grab it. See below: https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/15/16148250/microsoft-linkedin-third-party-data-access-judge-ruling https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/15/16148250/microsoft-linked... By reverse engineering the API, sure they can shut you down, but a lawsuit? Hardly.

tptacek 8y ago
Whoah, hold on. You're referring to a preliminary injunction issued in a case that hasn't been tried yet; not only that, but LinkedIn appealed that judgement, and their appeal is still pending. That case also revolved around antitrust liability, which Twitter doesn't have. It is not at all settled that anything in front of a login screen is public and not protected by TOS's. And, of course, here we're talking about things that appear after a login page. https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_video.php?pk_vid=0000013344 https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_video.php?pk_vid=000... The 5-minute spans around minute 20 and around minute 53 are particularly interesting. Even HiQ agrees that they have no right to ignore TOS terms pertaining to things behind login screens.
- sulam 8y ago
  You can see tweets without logging in. People do it all the time, and websites do it even more.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    Follow the thread back to its root to see that that's not what we're talking about here.
rory096 8y ago
>That's actually not true, if it's public information, then you're free to grab it. Er, since when? Auernheimer/weev was sentenced to 4 years for "hacking" AT&T by changing a URL parameter to access other customers' info. It was questioned in the appeal decision that let him go, but the ruling was on narrow (venue) grounds. https://www.wired.com/2014/04/att-hacker-conviction-vacated/ https://www.wired.com/2014/04/att-hacker-conviction-vacated/

tptacek 8y ago

Whoah, hold on. You're referring to a preliminary injunction issued in a case that hasn't been tried yet; not only that, but LinkedIn appealed that judgement, and their appeal is still pending. That case also revolved around antitrust liability, which Twitter doesn't have. It is not at all settled that anything in front of a login screen is public and not protected by TOS's. And, of course, here we're talking about things that appear after a login page. https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_video.php?pk_vid=0000013344 https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_video.php?pk_vid=000... The 5-minute spans around minute 20 and around minute 53 are particularly interesting. Even HiQ agrees that they have no right to ignore TOS terms pertaining to things behind login screens.

sulam 8y ago
You can see tweets without logging in. People do it all the time, and websites do it even more.
- tptacek 8y ago
  Follow the thread back to its root to see that that's not what we're talking about here.

rory096 8y ago

>That's actually not true, if it's public information, then you're free to grab it. Er, since when? Auernheimer/weev was sentenced to 4 years for "hacking" AT&T by changing a URL parameter to access other customers' info. It was questioned in the appeal decision that let him go, but the ruling was on narrow (venue) grounds. https://www.wired.com/2014/04/att-hacker-conviction-vacated/ https://www.wired.com/2014/04/att-hacker-conviction-vacated/