> Impersonating Googlebot doesn't change the terms of the access. But I wouldn't be "impersonating" the Google bot, I would just be using it's user-agent strin

> Impersonating Googlebot doesn't change the terms of the access. But I wouldn't be "impersonating" the Google bot, I would just be using it's user-agent string. That does not make me the Google bot. If a foolish publisher chooses to interpret my usage of that string as me being Google, that is not my responsibility. Just like with the Weev situation, this is another case of someone trying to shift blame for their crummy security. A user-agent string is NOT authentication. It is merely supposed to provide a hint to the webserver. I once saw a website that didn't have ads and let you view their content for free if the width was less than 700px. I guess they figured they were driving away more mobile users or something that it was worth. So, was I being criminally minded when I resized my browser to view their content instead of jumping through their hoops and giving them my email address? At a certain point, it is not my responsibility to hold their hand and play along with their pretend restrictions.