Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

dubiousadvocate t1_jc2jom8 wrote

I don’t think legality enters into it. At worst it’s a EULA violation. Like any public facing website. Grounds for banning the account but these would be throw away accounts to begin. Musk would whine about it but he’d probably also embrace the artificial user numbers at the same time.

One thing we’ve all learned about the man during this debacle is he’s self destructively impulsive and undisciplined.

2

Mr_ToDo t1_jc2lulp wrote

Well it doesn't use the API, and assuming that it doesn't use a login then it's probably not bound by the EULA since it would all be public data with no agreement to see it.

Could be a bit of fun if it removes the login prompt, but it's pretty random normally and if there isn't an actual hard limit to what you can load then removing it is likely just a technicality at best(It seems more concerned about how long I stare at old tweets then how far down I scroll. I know sometimes I've gone years down if I don't stop scrolling)

2

haux_haux t1_jc3q8f1 wrote

Didn't LinkedIn sue an organisation for scraping a while back. Did that fly?

1

bobartig t1_jc42cxs wrote

There’s been a lot of misreporting regarding the recent HiQ v. LinkedIn case from the 9th Circuit. The best write up I've encountered is by an Internet and Web Scraping attorney, Kieran McCarthy

The key takeaway is that in the 9th Circuit (which has the most developed law in this area) web scraping a publicly available website doesn’t necessarily constitute a CFAA violation, but that doesn’t mean what you did was either legal, or that you won’t face legal liability.

3

dubiousadvocate t1_jc3uc8z wrote

I haven't heard about that. I'm curious too.

Of course anyone can file a SLAP lawsuit and hope to intimidate legal behavior through financial burden.

1