4 ms·

I thought the most recent legal argument was the 2019 hiQ Labs Inc v LinkedIn Corp[0], in which the Ninth Circuit found web scraping to be legal, and forbid Lin

I thought the most recent legal argument was the 2019 hiQ Labs Inc v LinkedIn Corp[0], in which the Ninth Circuit found web scraping to be legal, and forbid LinkedIn from blocking web scrapers. The exact same argument can be made for accessing YouTube via youtube-dl. The article does indicate that the decision in hiQ v LinkedIn was vacated by SCOTUS following the 2021 Van Buren v United States [0], to be retried by the Ninth Circuit. However, I'm not seeing a way that the decision in Van Buren would change the outcome, as it concluded that the CFAA did not apply to cases where somebody is legally allowed to access a computer at all. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiQ_Labs_v._LinkedIn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiQ_Labs_v._LinkedIn [1] https://techcrunch.com/2021/06/03/supreme-court-hacking-cfaa-ruling/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/06/03/supreme-court-hacking-cfaa...

infogulch 5y ago
Discussed on HN before: Court: Violating a site’s terms of service isn’t criminal hacking (2020) [1] (probably other discussions as well). My comment on this one: > ... it's the webmaster's own responsibility to "just not serve" if they don't want it to be served, and their failure to implement their own desires as software doesn't suddenly give them carte blanche to claim whatever they want was breaking the law. ... The fact that Microsoft is too lazy to implement a solution that effectively implements their desired policy isn't material to what the actually implemented policy enables. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22738180 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22738180
- bryanrasmussen 5y ago
  >The fact that Microsoft is too lazy to implement a solution that effectively implements their desired policy isn't material to what the actually implemented policy enables This implies that at some point someone would be able to say, we have tried to implement a policy, we have spent this many man hours of engineers, we have had 5 different solutions that were broken through, at some point these things must become hacking.
tedunangst 5y ago
Are youtube-dl users being charged with CFAA violations?

infogulch 5y ago

Discussed on HN before: Court: Violating a site’s terms of service isn’t criminal hacking (2020) [1] (probably other discussions as well). My comment on this one: > ... it's the webmaster's own responsibility to "just not serve" if they don't want it to be served, and their failure to implement their own desires as software doesn't suddenly give them carte blanche to claim whatever they want was breaking the law. ... The fact that Microsoft is too lazy to implement a solution that effectively implements their desired policy isn't material to what the actually implemented policy enables. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22738180 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22738180

bryanrasmussen 5y ago
>The fact that Microsoft is too lazy to implement a solution that effectively implements their desired policy isn't material to what the actually implemented policy enables This implies that at some point someone would be able to say, we have tried to implement a policy, we have spent this many man hours of engineers, we have had 5 different solutions that were broken through, at some point these things must become hacking.

tedunangst 5y ago

Are youtube-dl users being charged with CFAA violations?