> Keep in mind, LinkedIn ultimately lost that case Not really - the wiki page is confusing but the link is there: "In a November 2022 ruling the Ninth Circuit

> Keep in mind, LinkedIn ultimately lost that case Not really - the wiki page is confusing but the link is there: "In a November 2022 ruling the Ninth Circuit ruled that hiQ had breached LinkedIn's User Agreement and a settlement agreement was reached between the two parties." [0] It was a mixed ruling: hiQ successfully defended against the CFAA argument, and LI won the User Agreement argument. This is why OP needs to talk to a lawyer of their own who deeply understands this area of law. We all can paste links till the cows come home but only a real lawyer is going to have useful advice. More analysis by lawyers: https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2022/12/as-everyone-expected-years-ago-hiqs-cfaa-wins-dont-mean-it-can-freely-scrape-hiq-v-linkedin-guest-blog-post-part-1-of-2.htm https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2022/12/as-everyone-ex... https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2022/12/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-web-scraping-laws-guest-blog-post-part-2-of-2.htm https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2022/12/hello-youve-be... (Disclaimer: I work at LI but don't work in and have no special insight into this area; comments are my own) 0: https://www.natlawreview.com/article/hiq-and-linkedin-reach-proposed-settlement-landmark-scraping-case https://www.natlawreview.com/article/hiq-and-linkedin-reach-...