4 ms·
How is this not a massive copyright violation? When I upload a photo to, say, Instagram, I know I’m granting them a perpetual license to do basically anything w
by raldi 7y ago
How is this not a massive copyright violation? When I upload a photo to, say, Instagram, I know I’m granting them a perpetual license to do basically anything with my photo, but scrapers don’t inherit those rights.
- bobbylarrybobby 7y agoThe article does say what Ton-That did violates most sites' TOS. It's now up to the sites to take legal action against him.
- microdrum 7y agoI mean, it's a search engine right? Google scrapes Facebook at global scale.
- raldi 7y agoNo it doesn’t. Google honors Facebook’s robots.txt, which excludes basically all the valuable data. It’s why they blew billions trying to get us all to switch to Google+.
- microdrum 7y agoThat's so weird because I see text and images from fb domains in google search results all the time. Likewise LinkedIn.
- raldi 7y agoNo, I’m talking about them being apparently vulnerable to a trillion-dollar copyright lawsuit from the users — that is, the owners of the copyrights on the photos they’re storing, analyzing, and redistributing.
- ec109685 7y agoThey should just Store the hash. That said, maybe they are able to argue in the same way Google Image Search does that it is fair use.
- raldi 7y agoGoogle Image Search has consent of the site owners, via robots.txt