Live data from Hacker News

How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

xlii.space

271–275 of 275 posts

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you obtain the satellite images directly from Google Maps, you can still have problems because you might not have permission to use the data. That's not copyright though.

> you might not have permission to use the data Isn't it fair use, like training data?

When you've got the lawyer budget of Google/OpenAI/Anthropic, you can twist and bend copyright and licences to take what you want with little consequence.

OSM doesn't have the resources to fight Google or similar if they are threatened, so it's better to just avoid using data you don't have the right license for.

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you might not have permission to use the data Isn't it fair use, like training data?

Google Maps has commercial licenses to some of their data. Reusing that data without your own license can cause problems you might not like. This mostly applies in cases where it's provable that the data you used would've required a license that you do not have.

Facts cannot be copyrighted.

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#273

Google has forgotten the plot. A quick tangent story follows: I attempted to add a Tesla Supercharger as it went live to Google Maps. I was the very first to pay to recharge at the new location. The process went something like this: 1st time: Uploaded 4 photos, local business info, current charger prices, and GPS coordinates. Google replied this would be sent to human review. It was rejected within 6 minutes. 2nd att…

Why are you doing work for them for free - and at that level of annoyance no less?

Re: How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads

#275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the issue is the ToU violation, not copyright.

Violating a ToU is legal, but the corporation might ban you in return because that's legal too. All you give up is your ostensible right not to be banned.

It's a civil offense, but that's different from it being legal. It just means that it's up to the company itself to sue you to collect any damages, and government enforcement bodies aren't going to touch it.

The issue most ToU violations have with enforcement is that it's hard to show damages. If you just accessed their service with a fake name or downloaded some data for personal use, you haven't really harmed the company. So what are they gonna do, spend $10M to sue you for $0? So they just handle it internally by banning your account and discontinuing your use of the service.

But if, say, you did a DDoS attack that caused an outage costing them $100M, or you did large-scale scraping to set up a competitor that puts them out of business, and they can identify you, they absolutely will come after you in court for that money. The economics is different: now the damages they show is much more than the cost of litigating the case.

Post reply on HN