What crime? the TOS is the governing contract with the user. The only remedy is binding arbitration, not the courts. The user specifically disclaims all other remedies. In the event that a court holds this to be unenforceable in a jurisdiction, the user has already agreed that they will file any litigation exclusively in New York County.
Also note this clause: "The exclusive means of resolving any dispute or claim arising out of or relating to these Terms of Use (including any alleged breach thereof), the Service, or the Website shall be BINDING ARBITRATION administered by the American Arbitration Association." Other parts of the TOS govern privacy (or the lack thereof). That would be part of "any dispute or claim arising out of or related to these Terms of Use.", since this arbitration is not exclusive to the relationship between the user and OKCupid, but ANY dispute.
Kind of hard to bring something before the courts when the user has waived that right.
Read the OKCupid TOS. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy. So even European users can't sue because their data isn't private, because they were informed otherwise, and advised to use a fake name if they wanted to try to stay private, same as you don't use your real name on slashdot.
You obviously haven't read the OKCupid TOS. There is no expectation of privacy, users are informed not to use their real names, and the purpose of the site is to disseminate the data in the user's profile.
Kind of hard to argue that your data has any reasonable expectation of privacy when the contract between the user and OKCupid says otherwise. Or does the EU no longer recognize contracts?
Read the TOS. They make it clear that users cannot expect privacy. Any violation would be strictly between OKCupid and the researchers, not the individual users, since there was no expectation of privacy in the first place.
The user, according the the OkCupid TOS, explicitly understands that the data is not going to be private, and that OKCupid has no obligations in that respect. The purpose of posting info to OKCupid is to disseminate that information, so the user, even if they haven't read the TOS, has no reasonable expectation of privacy. They are even encouraged, in the TOS,, to not use a real name if they want to try to preserve some semblance of privacy.
There is no privacy claim from anyone in the EU because they agreed to the TOS. Tough sh*t.
That's under EU law for a server located in the EU. EU law doesn't apply in Oklahoma. Also, the TOS encourages people to not use their real name (you DID read the TOS before commenting, didn't you?) There is no guarantee whatsoever of any information being private, and anyone who agreed to that TOS, well, touch beenies, they agreed to it.
Also, how would user myowntrueself' have standing to claim any violation, since that's not even a legal person, just a phony screen name? So all the info under that name is not personally identifiable information, unlike me, who unlike most of the cowards on the internet, uses their name, knowing full well that there is NO expectation of privacy when you put something on a server that's accessible world-wide for the express purpose (in OKCupid's case) of distributing that very information to others, and the TOS makes it clear that there is NO expectation of privacy.
The first hurdle is that the individual willfully exported their data to another jurisdiction, for the purpose of it (hopefully) being viewed by as many people as possible. There was no expectation of privacy. It would be the same as if they posted it on a billboard and then claimed that anyone reading it was violating their privacy.
The TOS make it very clear that OKCupid has no responsibility to keep any supplied information private. Also, while it refers to a bona fide profile, their definition is a profile that is created to find others online. There is no requirement to use a real name, so creating accounts with fake names is ok under the TOS. If you read the privacy section, they warn against using your real name.
So, how is machodude345's personal information violated, when there is no such legal person to bring that claim? Oh, right, you can't violate the privacy of a fictitious person. Duh!
They did not have any test subjects. The data was not proprietary. the server was not hacked. The users wanted the data to be accessible to the general public. And how many people can claim it's their personal information when they haven't even used their real names? None. So in effect, the data is anonymized, and even the few who used their real names, there's no way to know that was the case, unless someone did research to find out, and anyone can do that as well.
In certain parts of the country, your best shot at finding somebody good is to go online. I'm not sure I know anybody locally that found anybody actually in person.
Please, let everyone know where those parts of the country are, so we can avoid them. Generations of people have found someone without the internet. It's called socializing, as opposed to (anti-)social media.
Not true. Otherwise, why would Microsoft want to move servers with customer data to the EU? Ad the server wasn't hacked, any more than if someone had used a screen reader in place of a screen scraper to access the data. Also,NONE OF THE DATA WAS PROPRIETARY. Not one single piece. Just a collection of facts which were voluntarily made available to the general public. There was no expectation of privacy whatsoever.
Call me back when the EU bans yearbooks or other collections of personal data that have been intentionally made public by the individual.
Where the company is based is entirely relevant. The server is in the US, so US law applies. If it was hosted in the EU, EU law would apply. Ask any law enforcement agency or the RIAA/MPAA how data access laws vary by country.
EU privacy laws don't cover servers in the US. That's why some companies are investigating moving their servers to the EU. If it's not hosted in Europe, the laws of the hosting country apply, and ONLY those laws.
Not is the server is in the US. This has been hashed out over and over on slashdot. It's why Microsoft wants to move some of its servers to Europe, remember?
European privacy laws don't have jurisdiction inside the USA. Why do you think people are moving servers to Europe for better data protection? This has been covered lots of times. You must be new here. Who'd you buy your user account from?
Scraping is not stealing any more than using a screen reader is stealing. Your theory means that anyone using their eyeballs to look at the website is stealing, anyone watching a movie in a theatre is stealing, anyone listening to music on the radio is stealing. Don't hum that tune - remembering it is a copyright violation!
Only problem, of course, is that facts cannot be copyrighted because they cannot be owned. There is no creativity in a fact. It's just a fact. Even if you spent years and millions, any fact you discover is considered "sweat of the brow" work, and not copyrightable.
EU privacy laws don't cover US companies with data stored in the US - that's covered by US laws. And it was most certainly made public, with not even minimal security. Otherwise fake accounts couldn't have scraped the data. You can't argue for privacy when you leave your bedroom windows wide open with a big "look in here" sign.
And nobody using OKCupid enters into an agreement with each individual person.
This is no more a criminal act than if I were to scrape slashdot. Or facebook. Or twitter. Or an online phone directory, which I scraped for 20 million names, numbers, and addresses about a decade ago - all legally.
Privacy laws? Come off it, on data the person made public? The facts that the individual made public are their information, not OKCupid's. They make it public, tough sh*t. Giving public information to a company doesn't suddenly make it not public when it's willingly posted on a public server with the express purpose of the public seeing it.
Sweat-of-the-brow work doesn't give rise to a grant of copyright, and since they didn't hack into the database, there is no way that they can be accused of taking the data in it's original format anyway.
The TOS doesn't have the ability to block fair use. In the US, you cannot claim copyright on facts, and the "compilation" part fails anyway because the facts were accessed individually, not as a compilation. Also, OKCupid isn't based in the EU.
It it's information that's publicly available, what's the problem? That is not "taking identifiable data without permission." Making it public IS permission.
Don't want to know something? Don't make it available to all and sundry on the internet. Sheesh.
If they don't reduce their population there's a pretty good risk that they will all be sterilized in a game of thermonuclear war. Malthus was right. If you have a problem with that, don't blame me.
Slashdot Mirror
Also note this clause: "The exclusive means of resolving any dispute or claim arising out of or relating to these Terms of Use (including any alleged breach thereof), the Service, or the Website shall be BINDING ARBITRATION administered by the American Arbitration Association." Other parts of the TOS govern privacy (or the lack thereof). That would be part of "any dispute or claim arising out of or related to these Terms of Use.", since this arbitration is not exclusive to the relationship between the user and OKCupid, but ANY dispute.
Kind of hard to bring something before the courts when the user has waived that right.
Read the OKCupid TOS. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy. So even European users can't sue because their data isn't private, because they were informed otherwise, and advised to use a fake name if they wanted to try to stay private, same as you don't use your real name on slashdot.
You obviously haven't read the OKCupid TOS. There is no expectation of privacy, users are informed not to use their real names, and the purpose of the site is to disseminate the data in the user's profile.
Kind of hard to argue that your data has any reasonable expectation of privacy when the contract between the user and OKCupid says otherwise. Or does the EU no longer recognize contracts?
Read the OKCupid TOS. No expectation of OKCupid keeping the data private. The TOS trumps the summary.
Read the TOS. They make it clear that users cannot expect privacy. Any violation would be strictly between OKCupid and the researchers, not the individual users, since there was no expectation of privacy in the first place.
The user, according the the OkCupid TOS, explicitly understands that the data is not going to be private, and that OKCupid has no obligations in that respect. The purpose of posting info to OKCupid is to disseminate that information, so the user, even if they haven't read the TOS, has no reasonable expectation of privacy. They are even encouraged, in the TOS,, to not use a real name if they want to try to preserve some semblance of privacy.
There is no privacy claim from anyone in the EU because they agreed to the TOS. Tough sh*t.
That's under EU law for a server located in the EU. EU law doesn't apply in Oklahoma. Also, the TOS encourages people to not use their real name (you DID read the TOS before commenting, didn't you?) There is no guarantee whatsoever of any information being private, and anyone who agreed to that TOS, well, touch beenies, they agreed to it.
Also, how would user myowntrueself' have standing to claim any violation, since that's not even a legal person, just a phony screen name? So all the info under that name is not personally identifiable information, unlike me, who unlike most of the cowards on the internet, uses their name, knowing full well that there is NO expectation of privacy when you put something on a server that's accessible world-wide for the express purpose (in OKCupid's case) of distributing that very information to others, and the TOS makes it clear that there is NO expectation of privacy.
The first hurdle is that the individual willfully exported their data to another jurisdiction, for the purpose of it (hopefully) being viewed by as many people as possible. There was no expectation of privacy. It would be the same as if they posted it on a billboard and then claimed that anyone reading it was violating their privacy.
The TOS make it very clear that OKCupid has no responsibility to keep any supplied information private. Also, while it refers to a bona fide profile, their definition is a profile that is created to find others online. There is no requirement to use a real name, so creating accounts with fake names is ok under the TOS. If you read the privacy section, they warn against using your real name.
So, how is machodude345's personal information violated, when there is no such legal person to bring that claim? Oh, right, you can't violate the privacy of a fictitious person. Duh!
The person willfully exported their data to a server in the US. Kind of useless to lock the barn door after the horse is gone.
They did not have any test subjects. The data was not proprietary. the server was not hacked. The users wanted the data to be accessible to the general public. And how many people can claim it's their personal information when they haven't even used their real names? None. So in effect, the data is anonymized, and even the few who used their real names, there's no way to know that was the case, unless someone did research to find out, and anyone can do that as well.
In certain parts of the country, your best shot at finding somebody good is to go online. I'm not sure I know anybody locally that found anybody actually in person.
Please, let everyone know where those parts of the country are, so we can avoid them. Generations of people have found someone without the internet. It's called socializing, as opposed to (anti-)social media.
Not true. Otherwise, why would Microsoft want to move servers with customer data to the EU? Ad the server wasn't hacked, any more than if someone had used a screen reader in place of a screen scraper to access the data. Also,NONE OF THE DATA WAS PROPRIETARY. Not one single piece. Just a collection of facts which were voluntarily made available to the general public. There was no expectation of privacy whatsoever.
Call me back when the EU bans yearbooks or other collections of personal data that have been intentionally made public by the individual.
Where the company is based is entirely relevant. The server is in the US, so US law applies. If it was hosted in the EU, EU law would apply. Ask any law enforcement agency or the RIAA/MPAA how data access laws vary by country.
So what if the data was copied in Europe. It was LEGALLY obtained from a server in Oklahoma. Are YOU stupid?
EU privacy laws don't cover servers in the US. That's why some companies are investigating moving their servers to the EU. If it's not hosted in Europe, the laws of the hosting country apply, and ONLY those laws.
Not is the server is in the US. This has been hashed out over and over on slashdot. It's why Microsoft wants to move some of its servers to Europe, remember?
European privacy laws don't have jurisdiction inside the USA. Why do you think people are moving servers to Europe for better data protection? This has been covered lots of times. You must be new here. Who'd you buy your user account from?
If you think that's screwed up, consider that soutien-gorge (bra) is a masculine noun.
Scraping is not stealing any more than using a screen reader is stealing. Your theory means that anyone using their eyeballs to look at the website is stealing, anyone watching a movie in a theatre is stealing, anyone listening to music on the radio is stealing. Don't hum that tune - remembering it is a copyright violation! Only problem, of course, is that facts cannot be copyrighted because they cannot be owned. There is no creativity in a fact. It's just a fact. Even if you spent years and millions, any fact you discover is considered "sweat of the brow" work, and not copyrightable.
EU privacy laws don't cover US companies with data stored in the US - that's covered by US laws. And it was most certainly made public, with not even minimal security. Otherwise fake accounts couldn't have scraped the data. You can't argue for privacy when you leave your bedroom windows wide open with a big "look in here" sign.
And nobody using OKCupid enters into an agreement with each individual person.
This is no more a criminal act than if I were to scrape slashdot. Or facebook. Or twitter. Or an online phone directory, which I scraped for 20 million names, numbers, and addresses about a decade ago - all legally.
Privacy laws? Come off it, on data the person made public? The facts that the individual made public are their information, not OKCupid's. They make it public, tough sh*t. Giving public information to a company doesn't suddenly make it not public when it's willingly posted on a public server with the express purpose of the public seeing it.
And you can't copyright facts. F*cking morons ...
Copyright does not protect facts,
Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co.
Sweat-of-the-brow work doesn't give rise to a grant of copyright, and since they didn't hack into the database, there is no way that they can be accused of taking the data in it's original format anyway.
The TOS doesn't have the ability to block fair use. In the US, you cannot claim copyright on facts, and the "compilation" part fails anyway because the facts were accessed individually, not as a compilation. Also, OKCupid isn't based in the EU.
It it's information that's publicly available, what's the problem? That is not "taking identifiable data without permission." Making it public IS permission.
Don't want to know something? Don't make it available to all and sundry on the internet. Sheesh.
If they don't reduce their population there's a pretty good risk that they will all be sterilized in a game of thermonuclear war. Malthus was right. If you have a problem with that, don't blame me.
Go to Germany. The education is free, you can do it without knowing German, and you might just decide to stay there after. Problem solved.
FTFA : Employees are now training their replacements.
Not enough guts to all say "screw that?" Don't have the tools to organize a mass walkout because you can't use email or social media?
Didn't learn anything from the prisoner's dilemma?
Well, once again, you can't fix stupid.