Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent)

parsers.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 409 posts

Re: Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent)

#41

Post by jermaustin1 »

kabacha wrote: post #22
JaceLightning wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

See that's where I have problem with this. Isn't data just _data_? Lets draw some pararells to real life. If I go to public space like town square - can't I take pictures, notes and records then go home and draw my analytics from it? What if I read something in a book I bought, can't I quote it? Same thing should be with web resources even if they are creative - as long as I don't publish them I should be able to scr…

You are discussing the fair use provisions of copyright law.

Not a lawyer, but:

You can do all of that, but:

You cannot scan the book you bought, and put it on your website for sale or even free - unless it's copyright is up or you are given permission by the copyright holder.

You can not take a picture of someones painting in high detail, then sell prints of it - unless it's copyright is up or you are given permission by the copyright holder.

Re: Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent)

#42

Post by dragonwriter »

fludlight wrote: post #25

This only affects the ninth circuit—which includes the tech hubs San Francisco, Seattle, LA, and Portland. It would only apply to the rest of the country if the Supreme Court affirmed it. Even then, a well-funded company or zealous prosecutor could say that it doesn’t apply in your case because of some technicality. In that case you would need hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars and a few years to litigate t…

> This only affects the ninth circuit—which includes the tech hubs San Francisco, Seattle, LA, and Portland.

It is only binding precedent in the Ninth Circuit, it is less accurate to say it only effects the Ninth Circuit, since decisions have effect other than as binding precedent.

Re: Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent)

#43

Post by foxx-boxx »

andrewseanryan wrote: post #28

I ran a company based on web scraping for a couple years and I heard never ending comments about how what we were doing was illegal. Thank god that conversation is over.

You are abusing other people’s websites without intention to buy something. It’s a lot like stealing.

Re: Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent)

#44

Post by kabacha »

pc86 wrote: post #35
kabacha wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See that's where I have problem with this. Isn't data just _data_? Lets draw some pararells to real life. If I go to public space like town square - can't I take pictures, notes and records then go home and draw my analytics from it? What if I read something in a book I bought, can't I quote it? Same thing should be with web resources even if they are creative - as long as I don't publish them I should be able to scr…

> Isn't data just data ? No. At the risk of just repeating the comment you didn't understand, creative works are not "just data" - they are copyrightable works that the owner has control over who can use them, not just for profit, but for any reason with few exceptions. You don't just get to drop someone else's work product into your algorithm without their permission.

> You don't just get to drop someone else's work product into your algorithm without their permission.

Why not?

Re: Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent)

#45

Post by TrackerFF »

kabacha wrote: post #11

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.

I can understand why some do not want scrapers - increased traffic (with practically zero benefits to the owners) is one obvious reason.

(Some people will then say "But why not just offer APIs", but that's a lot of extra work and maintenance).

It's like with instagram and other social media platforms. The content creators put in the hard work, while the leeches are stealing content for their own benefit, giving zero credits to the original content creators.

Re: Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent)

#46

Post by pc86 »

foxx-boxx wrote: post #43
andrewseanryan wrote: post #28

I ran a company based on web scraping for a couple years and I heard never ending comments about how what we were doing was illegal. Thank god that conversation is over.

You are abusing other people’s websites without intention to buy something. It’s a lot like stealing.

Just wow. Don't create throwaways to comment, especially ridiculous comments that are objectively false.

Not every website is selling something, and there is no good faith way in the world to think of saving the result of an HTTP call from a service designed to serve up HTTP calls "abusing."

Re: Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent)

#47

Post by foxx-boxx »

TrickyRick wrote: post #32
thomasjames wrote: post #23

This wouldn't supersede any violations of the ToS, though. I guess it would mean they can't sue you (maybe?) but they could still kick you off their service. Could they still go after you for breach of contract?

Wasn't the point that they were scraping public profiles, i.e. they never signed up and thereby never signed any ToS?

Exactly

Re: Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent)

#48

Post by davorak »

Nitramp wrote: post #31
kabacha wrote: post #11

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.

"public" is not the right concept here I think. E.g. imagine a composer conducting a public airing of some work of music (e.g. on some festival). That you were able to hear the music in public doesn't mean the {composer,artists,...} give up their copyrights.

> public doesn't mean the {composer,artists,...} give up their copyrights.

Copyright law protects the original work of the composer and artists in your example.

User profile data on Linkedin is not Linkedin original work.

Additionally user profiles are mostly made up of facts, which are not copyrightable.

Re: Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent)

#49

Post by amelius »

pc86 wrote: post #35
kabacha wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See that's where I have problem with this. Isn't data just _data_? Lets draw some pararells to real life. If I go to public space like town square - can't I take pictures, notes and records then go home and draw my analytics from it? What if I read something in a book I bought, can't I quote it? Same thing should be with web resources even if they are creative - as long as I don't publish them I should be able to scr…

> Isn't data just data ? No. At the risk of just repeating the comment you didn't understand, creative works are not "just data" - they are copyrightable works that the owner has control over who can use them, not just for profit, but for any reason with few exceptions. You don't just get to drop someone else's work product into your algorithm without their permission.

I think the fashion industry should exert their right to have their work removed from photographs.

Re: Congrats! Web scraping is legal! (US precedent)

#50

Post by xnyan »

TrackerFF wrote: post #45
kabacha wrote: post #11

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.

I can understand why some do not want scrapers - increased traffic (with practically zero benefits to the owners) is one obvious reason. (Some people will then say "But why not just offer APIs", but that's a lot of extra work and maintenance). It's like with instagram and other social media platforms. The content creators put in the hard work, while the leeches are stealing content for their own benefit, giving zero…

There’s a very effective way out, don’t your data on the public web.
Post reply on HN