4 ms·
If you have to login to access the data, that data isn't publicly available, and unlikely to be protected by this decision. Page 31 of the filing specifically
by meritt 7y ago
If you have to login to access the data, that data isn't publicly available, and unlikely to be protected by this decision.
Page 31 of the filing specifically differentiates this case from one regarding Facebook:
"While Power Ventures was gathering user data that was protected by Facebook’s username and password authentication system, the data hiQ was scraping was available to anyone with a web browser."
- toomuchtodo 7y agoThe ol' DMCA trivial encryption switcharoo. I'd expect a lot more sites and their data to require a login now, to the detriment of the data being publicly indexed.
- dickjocke 7y agoWait, doesn't Linkedin have pretty strong authentication safeuguards to view user profiles. if you google someone and click their linkedin without being logged in to LinkedIn, you're always directed to sign up or log in to it. Twitter is the only example I can think of among the large social media sites that doesn't require you to be logged in to see profiles
- tanderson92 7y agoEven twitter requires you to be logged in to view "replies" on a user's profile.
- bartread 7y agoNope. You can see public profiles without being logged in. Certainly the case here in the UK; not sure about elsewhere.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoIt's not authentication safeguards, it's dark UX patterns driving you to signup. Whether or not you'll see someone's profile and how much of it you'll see depends on how they fingerprint you, where you navigate from, and on the phase of the Moon. LinkedIn is notorious for that. My memory might be misleading me here, but I think I remember years ago in one case I could see less info about a profile when logged in to my account than I could see while logged out and navigating from a Google search...