Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Internet
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-19-2013, 07:16 PM
 
Location: Poway
1,445 posts, read 2,732,023 times
Reputation: 954

Advertisements

Some web site admins will use IP address blocking to keep certain users from regaining access when they have been found to violate the TOS of their site. This is easy to circumvent. One way is to use a public anonymous proxy to give you another IP address (your connection goes through their network to do this).

However, a federal judge ruled today that this practice violates the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA).

I don't think this is the last we will hear of this. Certainly this will need to be clarified.

Changing IP address to access public website ruled violation of US law | Ars Technica
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-19-2013, 08:40 PM
 
23,541 posts, read 69,986,238 times
Reputation: 48978
The judge is a fascist idiot. It happens.

So... the guy uses a proxy in a different country. He is accessing through that country and subject to the laws applied there. Is he illegal in getting a link to a different country? No.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 09:37 PM
 
Location: Poway
1,445 posts, read 2,732,023 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by harry chickpea View Post
The judge is a fascist idiot. It happens.

So... the guy uses a proxy in a different country. He is accessing through that country and subject to the laws applied there. Is he illegal in getting a link to a different country? No.
The way I interpreted it, and the argument made in this case, is that if an administrator denies use of a web site to specific person, then any action by that person to circumvent the measures used to deny services is a violation of CFAA. That includes the use of proxies.

There is a link to a PDF file with the actual legal brief.

To be fair, I think the judge is following the letter of the law. This is not the first time legal interpretations of activity on the internet fly in the face of technical common sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 10:59 PM
 
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
688 posts, read 894,964 times
Reputation: 755
Quote:
Originally Posted by harry chickpea View Post
The judge is a fascist idiot. It happens.

So... the guy uses a proxy in a different country. He is accessing through that country and subject to the laws applied there. Is he illegal in getting a link to a different country? No.
He is initiating the connection via another country, though indirect, he is still connecting through his computer, at home, in the US.

I don't find anything wrong with that ruling. If an administrator denies you access to his internet content, you finding workarounds to access it anyway should be against the law. If you were banned from a local store, would it be okay for you to put on a mask and walk right in?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 11:35 PM
 
23,541 posts, read 69,986,238 times
Reputation: 48978
Doesn't work quite like that. Here is the core of the problem - Craigslist has claimed that it wants to be "local" to limit fraud. There are many people, like myself, that are on the border of THREE Craigslist zones and near a few others. When I search, it is a royal PITA, because I cannot conjoin the searches. Others have seen the problem and repeatedly attempted to allow larger searching.

Let us not forget that CL is about the only meaningful option to eBay, and eBay owns stock in CL, and does larger searches. Can you say "hmmmmm?" If you dug deep enough, I'll bet you a dozen donuts that you would find a monopoly and restraint of trade. The problem is that no one CAN dig deep enough.

The "scraping" has no legitimate financial negative effect on CL. In essence, what it allows is little guys like me to see what is for sale in the area. Banning the scraping is a protection for eBay more than anything. There is no charge for CL postings or sales, ergo no damages.

If the site was being loaded with spam (as city-data constantly fights) there are many other ways of addressing that as well. Remember also that each individual posting on CL OWNS the copyright to their own post. I have yet to hear of someone objecting to their ad there getting a wider audience.

This is a form of protectionism that any judge with half a brain would see through.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2013, 12:08 AM
 
41,815 posts, read 50,820,449 times
Reputation: 17863
Quote:
Originally Posted by harry chickpea View Post
If the site was being loaded with spam (as city-data constantly fights) there are many other ways of addressing that as well.
I have quite a few items on there becsue we cleaned out a deceased relatives home, despite the blocks I still have a box full of spam replies asking me to use their real address instead of replying through CL. <sigh>

In any event the person paying for the server gets to decide who can and cannot use their services. As long as the user who's IP is being block has been informed of the reason for the block I'd have to agree with the judges decision.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2013, 09:10 AM
 
Location: The DMV
6,561 posts, read 11,198,823 times
Reputation: 8590
No lawyer here, so my opinion is that of a layman's.

Does the method of access matter? 3Tap's authorization to use CL's content was revoked - yet they went against that and gained access without authorization. I read this more as whether or not CL has the authority to deny access....and I don't see why not?

It also mentioned that IP block may not be much of a "Technology barrier" because its easy to circumvent. Is the complexity of a control a factor now? Is breaking and entering different if I kicked down a flimsy door vs. guessing the combo on a cipher lock attached to a steel door?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2013, 11:34 AM
 
23,541 posts, read 69,986,238 times
Reputation: 48978
The concept is pretty straightforward if you stop and consider it. The judge apparently didn't.

CL does not want content used outside of CL pages.
CL is a free and open site, allowing the public to enter and leave at will.

The legal question is - is the use of CL content illegal? It has nothing to do with HOW such content is accessed.

The judge was totally off-base in saying that VIEWING a free public site by using a proxy is illegal.

The primary issue is - Does CL actually have and hold copyright to the individual ads on the site?
The second issue is - is there a measurable loss from a third party aggregating and sorting the ads there and presenting them in a more user friendly manner?
The third issue is - is there a de-facto monopoly that changes the rule of law and standards?

Start by recognizing that public reading of the site does not require the reader agree to a T.O.S.
Banning someone from reading a public site is not only illogical, it is a violation of the concept of "public."
It MAY be legal for CL to go after the USE of the content gained by reading, and that shows where banning viewing through a proxy is a red herring in the mystery of what is legal and illegal in the case.

Again, consider that CL could upgrade their own system to be more user friendly, gain more users, and become more successful. It INTENTIONALLY does not and goes after others who attempt to do this as a third party. That is not a sane business policy if you take CL at face value.

Where it all starts making sense is when you consider how aggressive eBay has been towards other competitors, how it couldn't take down CL in that CL wasn't using any auction software even remotely the same as that used by eBay. eBay boxed in CL until it could get a stockholder pulpit. CL has become a shield for eBay in that it can point to it as a (problematic) alternative, freely available, and therefore eBay DOESN'T have a monopoly. It is as if Henry Ford had a lock on gearboxes and only allowed competing cars if they didn't have a gearbox, even to the point of helping one of those "competitors" with free legal advice.

It isn't a conspiracy, it is simply the way big business does business to the detriment of the public.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2013, 01:27 PM
 
41,815 posts, read 50,820,449 times
Reputation: 17863
Quote:
Originally Posted by harry chickpea View Post
The primary issue is - Does CL actually have and hold copyright to the individual ads on the site?
The second issue is - is there a measurable loss from a third party aggregating and sorting the ads there and presenting them in a more user friendly manner?
I don't think copyright is the primary issue at all at least as far as CL is concerned but if you want to get into that the user has agreed to allow CL to republish their copyrighted material. They haven't licensed the aggregator any right to that material.

The second issue you state is the primary issue. It's not a public service, public would imply I have to let the public use my service. It's a private service the public is allowed to use with exceptions set by the site owner. CL is paying the bill for those servers and they have every right to restrict access to those services whether it's through an IP block, paywall, login or any other means. You have third party utilizing CL's resources for their own gain and that is unaccepatable.

It's not the law but the standard here is if you're going to run a spider over a site you need to indentify your spider with a unique user agent string, e.g. Googlebot. There is file called robots.txt that contains general directives for all spiders and specific directives for each unique spider. If you're spider is not obeying that file then your considered a rogue spider.

http://www.craigslist.org/robots.txt
Quote:
##############################
# Exclude robots from these

User-agent: YahooFeedSeeker
Disallow: /forums
Disallow: /res/
Disallow: /post
Disallow: /email.friend
Disallow: /eaf
Disallow: /reply
Disallow: /?flagCode
Disallow: /ccc
Disallow: /hhh
Disallow: /sss
Disallow: /bbb
Disallow: /ggg
Disallow: /jjj

User-Agent: OmniExplorer_Bot
Disallow: /

User-agent: *
Disallow: /cgi-bin
Disallow: /cgi-secure
Disallow: /forums
Disallow: /search
Disallow: /res/
Disallow: /post
Disallow: /email.friend
Disallow: /eaf
Disallow: /reply
Disallow: /?flagCode
Disallow: /ccc
Disallow: /hhh
Disallow: /sss
Disallow: /bbb
Disallow: /ggg
Disallow: /jjj
Disallow: /*rss$


#####################################
Thje first two are directives are for those specific spiders, the last one is for any other spider which bans any spider from those directories.




Quote:
The third issue is - is there a de-facto monopoly that changes the rule of law and standards?
I have a free classified section on my site that does quite well....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2013, 06:41 PM
 
23,541 posts, read 69,986,238 times
Reputation: 48978
While I don't fall in lockstep with what you have said, I think you would have done a darnsite better than the judge in understanding the relative merits and issues and forming a proper legal ruling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Internet
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top