SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for FatPhil
Good news out of the Ninth Circuit: the federal court of appeals heeded EFF's advice and rejected an attempt by Oracle to hold a company criminally liable for accessing Oracle's website in a manner it didn't like. The court ruled back in 2012 that merely violating a website's terms of use is not a crime under the federal computer crime statute, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. But some companies, like Oracle, turned to state computer crime statutes—in this case, California and Nevada—to enforce their computer use preferences.
This decision shores up the good precedent from 2012 and makes clear—if it wasn't clear already—that violating a corporate computer use policy is not a crime.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Ninth Circuit Doubles Down: Violating a Website’s Terms of Service Is Not a Crime
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 46 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Hey, wait a minute!! I want a divorce!! ... you're not Clint Eastwood!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2018, @09:26PM (5 children)
What are you talking about? The transaction is thus: The user agrees to the usage contract, and in return gets to use the website.
If you don't like a usage contract, then don't agree to it; don't use that website.
"But... I don't like this." is not a valid argument against these things.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2018, @09:41PM
Well, by that argument, does that also apply to any linked code from other sites? You viewed it. Are you now beholden to any TOS from those adware and malware spewing pieces of trash?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by tftp on Thursday January 11 2018, @09:45PM (1 child)
That would require giving access only to the registered users - who during sign-up confirmed the contract in some meaningful way. Every company that has anything to keep private does that. Try to get some datasheets without signing up, or some 3D models... Registration at professional, industrial websites is expected because in return you get information that is not obtainable otherwise, anywhere.
A user of a regular website does not achieve informed consent because he does not read the conditions and does not have to accept the offer. In your own example "The user agrees to the usage contract, and in return gets to use the website" the user can easily not agree to the contract and still use the website. To block the alternative the regular website has to be converted to "registered users only" - and the visitor count will drop to 1% of the previous number because nobody is going to register to just read an article. The attention span of an Internet user is 5 seconds.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2018, @09:50PM
The only problem is one of enforcement. As someone else noted, a restaurant that gives out free bread shouldn't surprised that some people abuse its resources.
There's nothing inherently non-binding about a Terms of Service; it's just not practical to enforce in the case that you outlined, and part of the government has now explicitly stated that you cannot use its CRIMINAL JUSTICE machinery to enforce it either.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 12 2018, @01:56AM
I do not agree to the terms, and I still use the website. What are you going to do about it? If you don't want me using your website, you should get it the frick off of the goddamned network, because by allowing use of your website by those who explicitly do not agree to your terms, you are agreeing to their terms, that they can use your website in any manner they wish that is technically feasible. Contracts swing both ways, which is why most alt-right libertarians are gay.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 12 2018, @08:30AM
That's all fine on sites that require login.
But on websites that don't require login, the user gets to use the website even though he didn't agree to the contract. And the people running those websites would be really sad if the 99.99% of users who didn't agree to any contract suddenly went away.