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

Taking action against scraping for hire

about.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 240 posts

Re: Taking action against scraping for hire

#51

Post by golemotron »

dementiapatien wrote: post #25
fxtentacle wrote: post #16

Of course, Facebook wants to make it sound like scraping is illegal, when it generally isn't. But account hijacking and mass-creation of accounts just to access private pages are clear violations of the Facebook and Instagram ToS, so they surely can sue for that.

Since when do you get sued for breaching TOS?

You can get sued for anything that causes harm.

Relevant life lesson: don't do things to people with money that they might perceive as harm.

Corollary: Being sued is as much punishment as losing a suit for most people.

Re: Taking action against scraping for hire

#52

Post by contravariant »

dementiapatien wrote: post #25
fxtentacle wrote: post #16

Of course, Facebook wants to make it sound like scraping is illegal, when it generally isn't. But account hijacking and mass-creation of accounts just to access private pages are clear violations of the Facebook and Instagram ToS, so they surely can sue for that.

Since when do you get sued for breaching TOS?

I don't know but it's at least been that way since Aaron Swartz did it I suppose.

Re: Taking action against scraping for hire

#54

Post by squaresmile »

htrp wrote: post #13

This is different from LinkedIn v HiQ because HiQ was only scraping publicly available data that was generally accessible to the broader internet. In these two cases, the data is being scraped from FB/Insta using credentials that the client handed over or the mass creation of accounts solely for scraping purposes.

Yeah, I think this is more like the Cambridge Analytica situation.

Re: Taking action against scraping for hire

#55

Post by footlose_3815 »

fxtentacle wrote: post #16

Of course, Facebook wants to make it sound like scraping is illegal, when it generally isn't. But account hijacking and mass-creation of accounts just to access private pages are clear violations of the Facebook and Instagram ToS, so they surely can sue for that.

[dead]

Re: Taking action against scraping for hire

#56

Post by falcolas »

saddlerustle wrote: post #42
slightwinder wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article, it seems to be service for scrapping data you have access anyway. As long as they only handle those data to the requesting customer, whose login they used, I don't see a difference between general public, and this users personalized "public". If access is still limited to the people who have the access-rights, then I don't see a difference between accessing through the official interface, or via scr…

Users make information available on facebook with the expectation that they are able to later control access to it (other than the obvious threat model of screenshotting, etc). This is violating that expectation and thus their privacy.

> they are able to later control access to it

This has never realistically been the case. An illusion of control is provided by facebook, but they've never really put much effort into it. For a really simple example, look at how long content remained available to the entire internet after "deletion". Sometimes it took years.

Expecting any semblance of privacy from a company who profits from using and selling your data is, if I'm being blunt, lunacy.

Re: Taking action against scraping for hire

#57

Post by gfodor »

saddlerustle wrote: post #42
slightwinder wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article, it seems to be service for scrapping data you have access anyway. As long as they only handle those data to the requesting customer, whose login they used, I don't see a difference between general public, and this users personalized "public". If access is still limited to the people who have the access-rights, then I don't see a difference between accessing through the official interface, or via scr…

Users make information available on facebook with the expectation that they are able to later control access to it (other than the obvious threat model of screenshotting, etc). This is violating that expectation and thus their privacy.

This is a false expectation and it’s important people learn this.

Re: Taking action against scraping for hire

#58

Post by zinekeller »

danaris wrote: post #46
CoastalCoder wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I know the answer, but I'm curious: Does violating a website's TOS meant your accessing it beyond your authority, making it a violation of the US's Computer Fraud and Abuse Act?

I don't have a source for this, but my recollection is that this has been successfully argued by a couple of companies—but then an appeals court found very firmly that it was not the case. Essentially, having that be true would mean that any given website could create whole new classes of criminal behavior.

> having that be true would mean that any given website could create whole new classes of criminal behavior.

While this is true, reading the lawsuit it is clear that Meta is suing in civil court, so maybe they're trying to enforce their contract, especially their automated collection ToS (https://www.facebook.com/apps/site_scraping_tos_terms.php)?

Re: Taking action against scraping for hire

#59

Post by iandanforth »

Collecting the rhetorical BS:

"scraping attacks"

Scraping is not an attack. Monopolists want to pretend they own your data because they get unlimited access to monetize it whereas competitors should have none.

"self-compromised"

Monopolists want to sell you thus it's imperative they maintain the fiction of "one person, one account". By admitting you own your account, they'd have to allow sharing and they wouldn't be able to provide their customers (advertisers) with reliable data about individuals.

"protect people from scraping"

Monopolists will protect themselves and call it protecting you. They will attempt to make you afraid of some other actor using your data in harmful ways so as to detract from how they monetize you and use your data in harmful ways.

"deter the abuse"

Monopolists don't want to argue about what constitutes abuse. Anything they write in their TOS is entirely for their benefit and only constrained by local law (if that). They will abuse you to the fullest extent they can get away with while arguing that any action to use your rights is "abuse."

"safeguard people against clone sites"

Monopolists want to maintain their monopoly, there is no greater threat than a direct challenge to that monopoly by allowing data to move freely.

--

More subtle but even more ironic rhetorical points

"for hire" / "paying for access"

Emphasizing that people making money (gasp) for providing this service, is bad.

"industry leader in taking legal action" + "across many platforms and national boundaries, also requires a collective effort from platforms, policymakers and civil society"

Monopolists can pay high priced marketers to rebrand them as patriotic hero figures fighting valiantly for the little guy.

Re: Taking action against scraping for hire

#60

Post by stonemetal12 »

Raed667 wrote: post #29
fxtentacle wrote: post #16

Of course, Facebook wants to make it sound like scraping is illegal, when it generally isn't. But account hijacking and mass-creation of accounts just to access private pages are clear violations of the Facebook and Instagram ToS, so they surely can sue for that.

Violation of ToS does not mean a violation of the law.

That is why they are suing rather than pressing charges. When someone steals your car you don't sue them you press charges. When someone doesn't uphold their end of a contract you don't press charges you sue for breach of contract.
Post reply on HN