3 ms·
That document should not be considered legally binding. It is not a contract. Robots.txt is not even really a standard, best it was is a draft, set to expire o
by AstralStorm 7y ago
That document should not be considered legally binding. It is not a contract.
Robots.txt is not even really a standard, best it was is a draft, set to expire on January 2nd next year.
The purpose of the file was to preserve performance, not to hide anything. It targets crawlers not API calls.
Consent of a non-single person business entity takes months at the very least, if it ever happens. It's easier for them to deny (incl. lawyers) and intimidate than compete and handle support tickets. Welcome to capitalism.
- skybrian 7y agoIn practice, the crawlers that read robots.txt don't do adversarial interoperability. If a website doesn't want to be in Google's index, they can opt out, and no lawyers are needed to do that.