Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data

reuters.com

11–20 of 85 posts

Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data

#11
The headline is misleading. What is happening is that LinkedIn is using user data for its own benefit only and blocking innovation. As a LinkedIn user I want everyone to have access to the data I'm sharing publicly through the service.

I can't wait for entrepreneurs to take on LinkedIn. There are a lot of opportunities there.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data

#13
If they do rule HiQ labs unable to scrape, can they also make sure ZoomInfo stops scraping LinkedIn profiles too?

I have seen people’s profiles scraped word for word and posted on ZoomInfo. And sold to salespeople who cold call you. Let put an end to this.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data

#14
post #5

2 questions I asked myself after reading this: 1) Do I side with LinkedIn or HiQ? 2) What case law precedent do I think we ought to set? I’m personally conflicted on which way to lean. I see pros and cons to both - this is an interesting case.

Scraping for non-profit purposes feels fine. Scraping for commercial purposes feels dirty. I don't know if there's a way for the law to square that circle.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data

#15
Any ideas how Microsoft wants to frame this so it becomes a partisan issue? Microsoft Legal can’t change the facts of the case, but presumably Microsoft PR wants to shape the narrative into one agreeable to the conservative majority on the court.

I have a feeling that regardless of the specifics, it will be a narrative where the little people lose and the big people get to keep playing. I would love to be proven wrong though.

If I’m right, it’s a stark reminder that Microsoft need only sustain its open-source friendly, developer-empowering persona as long as it’s convenient and rational. When there’s territory at stake, that veneer of friendliness begins to crack.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data

#16
This is a pretty bad headline. I don't know that i would characterize this as revived.

The same 9th circuit who held last year that LinkedIn could not block hiQ from scraping public data, just got asked to reconsider the same case, except now there is additional precedent that SCOTUS says if you had permission to access the computer then it's not a violation of the CFAA (even if you are a shady corrupt cop).

Hard to see this turning out any other way than the 9th circuit reaffirming their decision (or even strengthening it) and then it's up to LinkedIn to try SCOTUS again

Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data

#17
post #14
post #5

2 questions I asked myself after reading this: 1) Do I side with LinkedIn or HiQ? 2) What case law precedent do I think we ought to set? I’m personally conflicted on which way to lean. I see pros and cons to both - this is an interesting case.

Scraping for non-profit purposes feels fine. Scraping for commercial purposes feels dirty. I don't know if there's a way for the law to square that circle.

How about a browser extension that scrapes only the the profile you are visiting and adds that information to an ATS. Just to prevent a lot of copy paste.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data

#18
post #4

Curious to see which direction the Supreme court goes with this -- given the last CFAA ruling. >LinkedIn told the Supreme Court that hiQ's software "bots" can harvest data on a massive scale, far beyond what any individual person could do when viewing public profiles. So can anyone with a couple thousand dollars to burn. By barring US companies from doing it all you're going to do is move the work to another country…

Typo quibble: the data will still be scraped - if it was scrapped it wouldn't be an issue!

Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data

#20
post #8
post #4

Curious to see which direction the Supreme court goes with this -- given the last CFAA ruling. >LinkedIn told the Supreme Court that hiQ's software "bots" can harvest data on a massive scale, far beyond what any individual person could do when viewing public profiles. So can anyone with a couple thousand dollars to burn. By barring US companies from doing it all you're going to do is move the work to another country…

>LinkedIn told the Supreme Court that hiQ's software "bots" can harvest data on a massive scale, far beyond what any individual person could do when viewing public profiles. That doesn't seem any different than when I registered a new business in my state. I did that online, and before I received the printed, mailed confirmation from the state I was getting credit card offers in the mail addressed to the business. I'…

Secretary of State / corporate information is often sold in bulk without any need for scraping without authorization.

> Daily Filing Update – a file that includes all of the database updates for a specific day. Customers frequently begin by purchasing a Master Unload in order to create a database, and then subscribe to the Daily Filing Update so that they can download and update their databases on a daily basis to keep their data current with that maintained on the SOS BEST database.[0]

[0] https://direct.sos.state.tx.us/help/help-corp.asp?pg=bulk

Post reply on HN