Re:Show HN: Price changes alerts for any store
by pbhjpbhj on Wednesday August 31, 2016 @04:48PM
(#12401352)
I know Google have been treated as if it's a sui generis case, but surely Archive.org and many others are scraping and not being shutdown.
It's weird that the comparison between posting a robots.txt and a "no trespassers" sign hasn't been upheld? Or has it.
IMO the tort of copyright hasn't kept up well with tech changes, but transient cache copies are handled in EU laws IIRC.
Similarly with your mention of the CFAA (UK CMA has some similar terms), they're very loosely drafted. Not accounting for the need to communicate the limits of allowed access is silly though; there's a presumption of allowed access online IMO (that isn't mirrored offline) and going against that presumption should require explicit withdrawal of consent.
It's weird that the comparison between posting a robots.txt and a "no trespassers" sign hasn't been upheld? Or has it.
IMO the tort of copyright hasn't kept up well with tech changes, but transient cache copies are handled in EU laws IIRC.
Similarly with your mention of the CFAA (UK CMA has some similar terms), they're very loosely drafted. Not accounting for the need to communicate the limits of allowed access is silly though; there's a presumption of allowed access online IMO (that isn't mirrored offline) and going against that presumption should require explicit withdrawal of consent.
If I were drafting the law ...