> it's interesting that the top comment in the thread believes LinkedIn sued hiQ to stop it from scraping.
At time of writing, I believe that top comment is mine - and I'll be clear that I wasn't saying that I think that's why LinkedIn sued HiQ.
In fact I don't particularly care why they did it, I'm just interested in what precedents the case has set and whether the typical comments thrown around regarding the case have any actual merit.
There's a comment replying to mine that has a better breakdown of it all that I'd trust over my own anyway. ;P
Re:Web Scraping for Me, but Not for Thee
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 on Friday August 25, 2023 @09:41PM
(#37269142)
"In fact I don't particularly care why they did it, I'm just interested in what precedents the case has set and whether the typical comments thrown around regarding the case have any merit."
What are the "typical comments thrown around". Perhaps could provide some references.
I know, I linked to that blog over in my comment chain already. :)
Perhaps the author know who was this "litigation funder".
It seems that the funder wanted to settle, even though hiQ could have prevailed at trial on the CFAA claims. Arguably, hiQ's goal was not to establish new CFAA precendent, it was to stay in business. It wanted a Court to order LinkedIn to stop blocking its access to public data.
This took too long. hiQ ran out of money. (Or their funding sources ran out of patience.)
If hiQ had the funding to go the distance, then it's impossible to predict what would have happened.
it's interesting that the top comment in the thread believes LinkedIn sued hiQ to stop it from scraping. That's not what happened. hiQ's "business" was going to fail because LinkedIn was effectively blocking its access, even when hiQ was using proxies and mechanical turks. hiQ filed for a declaratory judgment against LinkedIn. hiQ sued LinkedIn.
hiQ was being funded by a third party, including the litigation against LinkedIn.
Who was it.
(hiQ allegedly could not pay its AWS, Salesforce and Splunk bills, and yet it could agreed to pay LinkedIn 500K.)
Here is the Order for anyone who cares to read it.
https://ia600100.us.archive.org/29/items/gov.uscourts.cand.3...
And the Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction
https://ia600100.us.archive.org/29/items/gov.uscourts.cand.3...