9th Circuit holds that scraping a public website does not violate the CFAA [pdf]

Re:9th Circuit holds that scraping a public website does not... by mehrdadn on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @06:39AM (#20926774)

> under spirit of net neutrality you either serve your site to everyone equally(the public facing part) or to no one

Huh? Net neutrality isn't about the server or client... it's about the network operator in between them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:9th Circuit holds that scraping a public website does not... by cabalamat on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @07:50AM (#20927181)

I suspect Xelbair is making a more expensive definition of net neutrality, taking as a basis the one that says it's about network operators only.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:9th Circuit holds that scraping a public website does not... by Darkphibre on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @09:01AM (#20927636)

I think you wanted to say more expansive? But it's definitely also more expensive. :D

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:9th Circuit holds that scraping a public website does not... by cabalamat on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @04:43PM (#20933499)

Yes, I meant expansive. Oops.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:9th Circuit holds that scraping a public website does not... by Xelbair on Wednesday September 11, 2019 @04:46AM (#20937815)

That was the case, hence the reference to the "spirit" of net neutrality.

Public facing internet sites, in my opinion, should be treated in same way as public space - anyone should be free to read, and write down in their notepad whatever is there, in the same way as anyone else.

Scraping public facing website in my opinion is huge waste of resources. It would be cheaper(in total) to build an API that can serve the data from it, than to build a good scraper.

[ Parent | on HN ]