3 ms·

If it's the user's data, then under GDPR the other site is obligated to provide a way for them to download/transfer it, specifically with this use case in mind.

If it's the user's data, then under GDPR the other site is obligated to provide a way for them to download/transfer it, specifically with this use case in mind. They are completely in the right to block you though, you're not the owner of that data, you might be breaking their TOS.

mrmanner 3y ago
“ In exercising his or her right to data portability pursuant to paragraph 1, the data subject shall have the right to have the personal data transmitted directly from one controller to another, where technically feasible.” They’re not necessarily in the right to block you, if you’re the data subject or acting on their behalf.
yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
> If it's the user's data, then under GDPR the other site is obligated to provide a way for them to download/transfer it, specifically with this use case in mind. In Europe, if the company is actually following the law, in theory yes. > They are completely in the right to block you though, you're not the owner of that data, you might be breaking their TOS. IANAL, but AIUI that's definitely not true in the United States and I suspect similar ideas hold elsewhere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiQ_Labs_v._LinkedIn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiQ_Labs_v._LinkedIn
- Klonoar 3y ago
  There are a litany of posts on this very site that detail why HiQ vs LinkedIn is more nuanced than you're making it out to be. HiQ didn't ultimately have the slam dunk win that people think they did.
BoorishBears 3y ago
This is non-sequitur to my comment: - GDPR doesn't require it be a convenient export. Users want to paste a link on my site, a click a button, and have it magically appear. Not fill out a form, dump their entire account and sift through that. - I never opined on the validity of blocking bots - I never opined on if it's breaking their TOS Abuse implies a harmfulness. Giving users a quick import option from already public data isn't harmful.

mrmanner 3y ago

“ In exercising his or her right to data portability pursuant to paragraph 1, the data subject shall have the right to have the personal data transmitted directly from one controller to another, where technically feasible.” They’re not necessarily in the right to block you, if you’re the data subject or acting on their behalf.

yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago

> If it's the user's data, then under GDPR the other site is obligated to provide a way for them to download/transfer it, specifically with this use case in mind. In Europe, if the company is actually following the law, in theory yes. > They are completely in the right to block you though, you're not the owner of that data, you might be breaking their TOS. IANAL, but AIUI that's definitely not true in the United States and I suspect similar ideas hold elsewhere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiQ_Labs_v._LinkedIn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiQ_Labs_v._LinkedIn

Klonoar 3y ago
There are a litany of posts on this very site that detail why HiQ vs LinkedIn is more nuanced than you're making it out to be. HiQ didn't ultimately have the slam dunk win that people think they did.

BoorishBears 3y ago

This is non-sequitur to my comment: - GDPR doesn't require it be a convenient export. Users want to paste a link on my site, a click a button, and have it magically appear. Not fill out a form, dump their entire account and sift through that. - I never opined on the validity of blocking bots - I never opined on if it's breaking their TOS Abuse implies a harmfulness. Giving users a quick import option from already public data isn't harmful.