News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on 9th Circuit holds that scraping a public website does not violate the CFAA [pdf]. Parent comment

Re:9th Circuit holds that scraping a public website does not... by eru on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @06:31AM (#20926726)
Why should you be forced to serve content to people who won't look at your ads?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:9th Circuit holds that scraping a public website does not... by RobAley on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @08:08AM (#20927287)
Like disabled users with screen-readers?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:9th Circuit holds that scraping a public website does not... by ehvatum on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @12:22PM (#20929894)
I suppose we can give them a pass if they solve a bunch of captchas.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:9th Circuit holds that scraping a public website does not... by kijin on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @06:47AM (#20926809)
Anyone is free to put up a paywall and deny access to people who don't pay.

But LinkedIn is apparently happy to let Googlebot and bingbot scrape public profiles. If they want to do that, they can't argue that their policy is to block bots who don't click on ads. Discriminating Googlebot from other visitors is probably a violation of Google policies, too. They can't have their cake and eat it at the same time.

[ Parent | on HN ]