U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data
1–10 of 85 posts
Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data
#2What would happen if they ban scraping altogether? Is this the end of google search?
Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data
#3It is because I am a strong advocate for privacy that I believe Microsoft is wrong. If Microsoft really wanted to protect user privacy they would restrict access to user data on their platform. This is basic entry level security: apply access control.
Microsoft wants to split hairs in order to both maximize revenue and prevent competitor access, which is nothing to do with privacy. If Microsoft wins companies will be able to use this verdict to destroy privacy for revenue gain.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data
#4Curious 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 that doesn't care about US Law. The data will still be scrapped nonetheless.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data
#52 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.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data
#6It is because I am a strong advocate for privacy that I believe Microsoft is wrong. If Microsoft really wanted to protect user privacy they would restrict access to user data on their platform. This is basic entry level security: apply access control . Microsoft wants to split hairs in order to both maximize revenue and prevent competitor access, which is nothing to do with privacy. If Microsoft wins companies will b…
I agree. I want to add that the headline is infuriatingly credulous of Microsoft's claims.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data
#7> 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 would it be legal if I funnelled the profiles into Mechanical Turk and had it manually entered?
Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data
#8Curious 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'm not glad how that played out, but I don't see any difference with hiQ collecting public information.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data
#9Scraping is inevitable. It seems like it exists in this grey area of a “hacky” accepted practice. I think it should be expected today. If it’s public, it’s public. Of course copyright applies, but day after tomorrow people will just run copy through a GPT-3-like scrambler or rephrasher or something and publish it anyways.
The reality is that anything public on the web will be able to be harvested and made use of —- sort of how it’s been and really how it should be.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court revives LinkedIn bid to shield personal data
#10It is because I am a strong advocate for privacy that I believe Microsoft is wrong. If Microsoft really wanted to protect user privacy they would restrict access to user data on their platform. This is basic entry level security: apply access control . Microsoft wants to split hairs in order to both maximize revenue and prevent competitor access, which is nothing to do with privacy. If Microsoft wins companies will b…
Yes, important to note that Microsoft is going after a competitor here; there are a bunch of data brokers that have been scraping LinkedIn for years and this is the case they're going after. I hope the Supreme Court can see through this BS and tell them to go pound sand.
(If Microsoft wanted to go after data brokers I'd be on board for that tho)