<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: LinkedIn Enjoined From Blocking Scraper&#8211;hiQ v. LinkedIn	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2017/08/linkedin-enjoined-from-blocking-scraper-hiq-v-linkedin.htm/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2017/08/linkedin-enjoined-from-blocking-scraper-hiq-v-linkedin.htm</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:30:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Jason Farnon		</title>
		<link>https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2017/08/linkedin-enjoined-from-blocking-scraper-hiq-v-linkedin.htm#comment-1919</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason Farnon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.ericgoldman.org/?p=17635#comment-1919</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s great to see some pushback on CFAA. Unfortunately this ruling won&#039;t stand long, not least because of the crazy order against erecting &quot;barriers&quot; to the scraping. Like you, I can&#039;t imagine what thinking was behind this. Even assuming zero technological sophistication, even assuming his analogy to taking a picture of a storefront window. It&#039;s not like a judge could issue an injunction to the store not to ever turn off the lights, or not to rearrange the storefront contents, just to satisfy some passing photographer...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s great to see some pushback on CFAA. Unfortunately this ruling won&#8217;t stand long, not least because of the crazy order against erecting &#8220;barriers&#8221; to the scraping. Like you, I can&#8217;t imagine what thinking was behind this. Even assuming zero technological sophistication, even assuming his analogy to taking a picture of a storefront window. It&#8217;s not like a judge could issue an injunction to the store not to ever turn off the lights, or not to rearrange the storefront contents, just to satisfy some passing photographer&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
