3 ms·

As long as it's not behind a login, and is publicly available, I think there's US precedent that this is unenforceable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiQ_Labs_

As long as it's not behind a login, and is publicly available, I think there's US precedent that this is unenforceable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiQ_Labs_v._LinkedIn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiQ_Labs_v._LinkedIn

dplgk 3y ago
They ended up settling https://www.natlawreview.com/article/court-finds-hiq-breached-linkedin-s-terms-prohibiting-scraping-mixed-ruling-declines https://www.natlawreview.com/article/court-finds-hiq-breache...
kube-system 3y ago
Not enforceable in a US court but it is enforceable through technical means.
- lossolo 3y ago
  > but it is enforceable through technical means What you mean by that? Currently it's not enforceable by any technical means, as I can scrape Twitter without any limitations.
  - kube-system 3y ago
    if(requests > bigNumber) banHammer(); Or whatever alternative bot detection they want to do. There are plenty of solutions for these types of problems.
    - HAL3000 3y ago
      > if(requests > bigNumber) banHammer(); If requests from who? or what? Account? IP? Because no one is doing it from one account or one IP. > There are plenty of solutions for these types of problems. Actually not a lot, it's a really hard problem to solve, unless you're referring to unsophisticated scrapers that have no idea what they're doing and are following some online tutorials on how to scrape Twitter. Out of desperation, they even implemented blanket bans on entire legitimate mobile carriers in some EU countries, but it didn't have a lot of impact on the business of Twitter scraping.
      - kube-system 3y ago
        "Enforceable" doesn't mean "infallible". Yes, it is a hard problem. Legal justice is also a hard problem. My above point is that twitter can unilaterally take steps to enforce their policy, i.e. they do not need to lean on legal mechanisms.
      - edmundsauto 3y ago
        There's another strategy possible here - technical blocking will prevent almost all scraping (proxies are damn expensive for hobbyists and hackers!). For people who go around these limitations, it will speak to their intent to bypass access limits and they can be taken down in a court. Non-business-entities of course may escape judgement if they cannot be found or are in a place that doesn't enforce these kinds of laws. However, I bet Twitter's bigger fear is the US and EU commercial entities and generative AI - limiting access and then going after them in court will stop a lot of commercial enterprises.
dahfizz 3y ago
Did you finish reading the page you linked? After the Supreme Court overruled the ninth circuit, HiQ was found to be in violation of the user agreement. They had to settle and pay $500k to LinkedIn. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/hiq-and-linkedin-reach-proposed-settlement-landmark-scraping-case https://www.natlawreview.com/article/hiq-and-linkedin-reach-...
- temporalparts 3y ago
  I'm very familiar with the case, HiQ was found in violation because they also created bot accounts from which they consented into the user agreement. LinkedIn lost based on merits of the scraping of public data.

dplgk 3y ago

They ended up settling https://www.natlawreview.com/article/court-finds-hiq-breached-linkedin-s-terms-prohibiting-scraping-mixed-ruling-declines https://www.natlawreview.com/article/court-finds-hiq-breache...

kube-system 3y ago

Not enforceable in a US court but it is enforceable through technical means.

lossolo 3y ago
> but it is enforceable through technical means What you mean by that? Currently it's not enforceable by any technical means, as I can scrape Twitter without any limitations.
- kube-system 3y ago
  if(requests > bigNumber) banHammer(); Or whatever alternative bot detection they want to do. There are plenty of solutions for these types of problems.
  - HAL3000 3y ago
    > if(requests > bigNumber) banHammer(); If requests from who? or what? Account? IP? Because no one is doing it from one account or one IP. > There are plenty of solutions for these types of problems. Actually not a lot, it's a really hard problem to solve, unless you're referring to unsophisticated scrapers that have no idea what they're doing and are following some online tutorials on how to scrape Twitter. Out of desperation, they even implemented blanket bans on entire legitimate mobile carriers in some EU countries, but it didn't have a lot of impact on the business of Twitter scraping.
    - kube-system 3y ago
      "Enforceable" doesn't mean "infallible". Yes, it is a hard problem. Legal justice is also a hard problem. My above point is that twitter can unilaterally take steps to enforce their policy, i.e. they do not need to lean on legal mechanisms.
    - edmundsauto 3y ago
      There's another strategy possible here - technical blocking will prevent almost all scraping (proxies are damn expensive for hobbyists and hackers!). For people who go around these limitations, it will speak to their intent to bypass access limits and they can be taken down in a court. Non-business-entities of course may escape judgement if they cannot be found or are in a place that doesn't enforce these kinds of laws. However, I bet Twitter's bigger fear is the US and EU commercial entities and generative AI - limiting access and then going after them in court will stop a lot of commercial enterprises.

dahfizz 3y ago

Did you finish reading the page you linked? After the Supreme Court overruled the ninth circuit, HiQ was found to be in violation of the user agreement. They had to settle and pay $500k to LinkedIn. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/hiq-and-linkedin-reach-proposed-settlement-landmark-scraping-case https://www.natlawreview.com/article/hiq-and-linkedin-reach-...

temporalparts 3y ago
I'm very familiar with the case, HiQ was found in violation because they also created bot accounts from which they consented into the user agreement. LinkedIn lost based on merits of the scraping of public data.