Search Results for “Timothy Lee”


September 10, 2019
Timothy B. Lee / Ars Technica

Timothy B. Lee / Ars Technica  
Appeals Court Rules That Website Data-Scraping Does Not Violate Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

In a legal battle that pits Microsoft-owned LinkedIn against a small data-analytics company called hiQ Labs, the U.S. 9th Circuit Appeals Court agreed with a lower court that scraping a public website without the approval of the website’s owner isn’t a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). HiQ scrapes data from the public profiles of LinkedIn users, then uses the data to help companies better understand their own workforces, a practice that, after a few years of tolerating it, LinkedIn demanded HiQ stop, citing the CFAA. The three-judge panel said that “the prohibition on unauthorized access contained in the CFAA is properly understood to apply only to private information—information delineated as private through use of a permission requirement of some sort.” But HiQ was only scaping information from public profiles and therefore did not violate the CFAA.

Related: The Register, ZDNet, Boing Boing, Slashdot, iTnews – Security, Tech Insider, DataBreaches.net, AP Breaking News, Computerworld, TIME, Last Minute Geek, TechNadu, Cyberscoop, DataBreaches.net, The Tech Report, Techdirt, EFF, DataBreaches.net

Tweets:@ericgeller @ACMcCosker

The Register: Welcome to The Reg’s poetry corner… hiQ once again / beats LinkedIn on web scrape case / more appeals await
ZDNet: Appeals court: LinkedIn can’t block public profile data scraping
Boing Boing: Important legal victory in web-scraping case
Slashdot: Web Scraping Doesn’t Violate Anti-Hacking Law, Appeal Court Rules
iTnews – Security: Microsoft’s LinkedIn loses appeal over scraping of user profiles
Tech Insider: How to delete your LinkedIn account and prevent people from seeing your personal information
DataBreaches.net: LinkedIn Can’t Block Analytics Company From Scraping Profiles
AP Breaking News: LinkedIn loses appeal in suit against data scraping startup
Computerworld : LinkedIn loses appeal over access to user profiles
TIME: Court Rules Startup May Collect Workforce Data from LinkedIn Profiles
Last Minute Geek : Important legal victory in web-scraping case
TechNadu: US Court Rules that Scraping Data from Public Websites Without Permission is Legal
Cyberscoop: Scraping public website data does not violate CFAA, judge rules
DataBreaches.net: Scraping A Public Website Doesn’t Violate the CFAA, Ninth Circuit (Mostly) Holds
The Tech Report: Court tells Microsoft web scraping is not hacking
Techdirt: Big News: Appeals Court Says CFAA Can’t Be Used To Stop Web Scraping
EFF: Victory! Ruling in hiQ v. Linkedin protects scraping of public data
DataBreaches.net: Scraping A Public Website Doesn’t Violate the CFAA, Ninth Circuit (Mostly) Holds

@ericgeller: Ninth Circuit: CFAA does not prevent mass scraping of public data. Huge limit on a cybercrime law that many civil-liberties advocates say has been repeatedly abused. http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/09/09/17-16783.pdf
@ACMcCosker: How significant is this for digital methods research? "Web scraping doesn’t violate anti-hacking law, appeals court rules"


June 3, 2015
Robert Graham / Errata Security

Robert Graham / Errata Security  
Uh, the only reform of domestic surveillance is dismantling it

A lot of smart people are cheering the reforms of domestic surveillance in the USA “FREEDOM” Act. Examples include Timothy Lee, EFF, Julian Sanchez, and Amie Stepanovich. I don’t understand why. Domestic surveillance is a violation of our rights. The only acceptable reform is getting rid of it. Anything less is the moral equivalent of forcing muggers to not wear ski masks — it doesn’t actually address the core problem (mugging, in this case).

April 4, 2019
Timoth B. Lee / Ars Technica

Timoth B. Lee / Ars Technica  
New Bill by Elizabeth Warren Would Jail Top Executives When Their Companies Experience Data Breaches Due to Negligence

New legislation from Massachusetts Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren, called the Corporate Executive Accountability Act, proposes personal, criminal liability for top executives of companies with revenues of over $1 billion per year when those companies experience data breaches and scams due to negligence. Under the bill, CEOs could get up to a year in prison for a first offense and repeat offenders could get three years. Warrens proposal is part of her much larger effort to crack down on corporate malfeasance which would allow prosecution of the CEO of any company whose illegal conduct threatens the health, safety, or finances of 1 percent of the public.

Related: Vox, Futurism, AppleInsider, DataBreaches.net, Boing Boing, VICE News, Ad Week, Slashdot, Washington Post, Warren.Senate.gov (PDF)


June 26, 2019
Timothy Lee / Ars Technica

Timothy Lee / Ars Technica  
FedEx Sues U.S. Government Over Chinese Tech Supplier Export Bans, Argues It’s Impossible to Inspect Technology in Shipped Packages

Following a string of disputes between FedEx and Huawei that may be connected to US export control laws, FedEx filed suit against the US Department of Commerce, arguing that US export control laws are so onerous that it’s impossible for FedEx to comply with them. Although the complaint doesn’t mention Huawei, FedEx is feeling the pressure now that the Trump administration has added Huawei and its affiliates to an “entity list” under export control law, making it illegal to ship a range of US-made technology to Huawei. The company lowered its earnings outlook due to the trade downwind after the administration determined that Chinese tech suppliers pose security chain threats due to fears that they embed spying technology on behalf of Bejing. FedEx argues that US export control laws are impossibly burdensome for a common carrier like FedEx because they are forced to determine whether any package violates the law by shipping US technology to a proscribed entity.