11–20 of 409 posts
This precedent doesn't really mean much but is definitely step in the right direction.
> Now many site owners are trying to put technical obstacles to competitors who completely copy their information that is not protected by copyright. For example, ticket prices, product lots, open user profiles, and so on. Some sites consider this information “their own”, and consider web scraping as “theft”. Legally, this is not the case, which is now officially enshrined in the US. Does this mean we can now scrape…
Probably not. Facts aren't copyrightable but creative works are. So prices on Amazon.com are facts. User reviews are creative so probably copyrighted. Similarly the videos on YouTube are copyrighted. However the number of views and the number of likes are probably scrapable.
I wonder if the number of stars are copyrighted. It's not creative, but a fact.
Wonder if this means more native apps that are harder to scrap and less websites from companies that don’t want their data scrapped.
> Now many site owners are trying to put technical obstacles to competitors who completely copy their information that is not protected by copyright. For example, ticket prices, product lots, open user profiles, and so on. Some sites consider this information “their own”, and consider web scraping as “theft”. Legally, this is not the case, which is now officially enshrined in the US. Does this mean we can now scrape…
> Now many site owners are trying to put technical obstacles to competitors who completely copy their information that is not protected by copyright. For example, ticket prices, product lots, open user profiles, and so on. Some sites consider this information “their own”, and consider web scraping as “theft”. Legally, this is not the case, which is now officially enshrined in the US. Does this mean we can now scrape…
Yes you can scrape them, no you cannot repubilsh them. Everything you listed is protected by copyright. You cannot infringe on copyrights because of this ruling. >hiQ argued that LinkedIn’s technical measures to block web scraping interfere with hiQ’s contracts with its own customers who rely on this data. In legal jargon, this is called” malicious interference with a contract”, which is prohibited by American law Do…
Linkedin is taking this to the Supreme Court: https://www.law360.com/articles/1237505/linkedin-will-go-to-... No ultimate decision was ever made, and no, this doesn't make web scraping 100% legal. Wake me up when there's a new announcement because anyone interested in this already know this old news.
The toxicity towards web-scraping is really what makes me lose hope in the current web. People want their data to be public and all of the benefits that comes with public data but then they want to chose who gets to see it - it's a complete and utter paradox. This precedent doesn't really mean much but is definitely step in the right direction.
> Now many site owners are trying to put technical obstacles to competitors who completely copy their information that is not protected by copyright. For example, ticket prices, product lots, open user profiles, and so on. Some sites consider this information “their own”, and consider web scraping as “theft”. Legally, this is not the case, which is now officially enshrined in the US. Does this mean we can now scrape…
Yes you can scrape them, no you cannot repubilsh them. Everything you listed is protected by copyright. You cannot infringe on copyrights because of this ruling. >hiQ argued that LinkedIn’s technical measures to block web scraping interfere with hiQ’s contracts with its own customers who rely on this data. In legal jargon, this is called” malicious interference with a contract”, which is prohibited by American law Do…