On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 9:38 PM, Joseph Sinclair
<
plug-discussion@stcaz.net> wrote:
> It's my personal analysis based on examining the issues for many individual cases, reading various sources on the issues, etc... I suspect your own position is similarly developed.
what part of this do you not understand?
"Any reproduction, modification, creation of derivative works from
or redistribution of the site or the collective work, and/or copying
or reproducing the sites or any portion thereof to any other server or
location for further reproduction or redistribution is prohibited
without the express
written consent of craigslist."
if you want to believe that scraping data from Craigslist is
perfectly safe practice, I suppose that you are entitled to your
opinion. However precedence has clearly shown that this sort of thing
is not legal. While at this point I am certainly not criticising
Kristian, nor do I think that what he's done has resulted in any
substantial legal exposure. The point is our current legal schema
does imply that scraping data and republishing it can be legitimately
prohibited in a user agreement (such as the one from Craigslist).
if you are even going so far as to suggest there is no precedence in
this area:
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/magazine/16-01/ff_scraping?currentPage=all
so Joseph, you think that its perfectly fine to scrape data from a
site and repurpose it as you see fit?
-jmz
>
> I am aware of the event(from 2005) referenced in your link. That Craigslist asked the site to come down does NOT mean the use was infringing, only that Craigslist sent a request and Oodle removed their content because they asked, NOT because Oodle did anything wrong. The issue of website scraping is an unsettled area of case law and as such is still quite muddy.
> Many people, myself included, would classify Kristian's site as fair use, but some would not. The final determination in law hasn't (AFAIK) been made. Since Kristian can always take the site down if and/or when he receives such a take-down notice, I don't see any harm in keeping the site up until then.
>
> Disclaimer:
> I am not a lawyer, I am an individual with opinions and thoughts, all of which are strictly my own and do not necessarily represent anyone else and/or anyone else's thoughts or opinions.
>
> ==Joseph++
>
>
>
> Joshua Zeidner wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 8:09 PM, Joseph Sinclair
> > <plug-discussion@stcaz.net> wrote:
> >> Given that you link to the source article, and the material is posted on a public forum and used primarily as a reference, it's likely that your use would be considered fair use, but it's a tricky area of law, so it's hard to tell for certain.
> >
> > What are you talking about? Did you just make that up?
> >
> > http://battellemedia.com/archives/001930.php
> >
> > - http://www.joshuazeidner.com/
>
>
--
-
http://www.joshuazeidner.com/
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)