OT pinching and re-using data of the net

USAF?

 

darsy wrote

So it is baseball practice or...

It seems to me that Tony does have a somewhat unusual sexuality and that
it might be appropriate to bring it to the attention of certain
agencies. It wouldn't hurt to have another layer of authority keeping a
close eye on him.

 

It's been a while since I sued anyone so I've forgotten the
terminology, but there are a couple of options for getting your
winnings from poor people. One is payments directly from their salary,
the other is a second charge on any property they have an interest in
(i.e. when they sell it, the mortgage company pay you directly). I
don't know if that applies to future properties they may buy, but I'd
guess not.

It isn't costly if you go the small claims route, & I really don't see
how you could lose tbh. But you'd only get a few £k paid over several
years so possibly not worth the hassle.



--
Krusty.

http://www.muddystuff.co.uk
http://www.muddystuff.us
Off-road classifieds

'02 MV Senna '03 Tiger (FOYRNB) '96 Tiger '79 Fantic 250

 

tallbloke wrote

Tea but thanks for offering.

 

*ding*

 

I've already had words with the Internet Watch Foundation.

 

@individual.net:

Problem with that is, you are pricing your reputation at less than 4999 or
whatever the max is at the smallclaims court these days.

 

darsy wrote

That's a bit ott innit, why didn't you just hire MOSSAD?

 

I think not. What is required here is *un*friendly fire.

 

No, you're absolutely right. Crap memory. Apologies. But you're still
wrong on the main point.

 

I wasn't trying to pick an argument or score points in the first place, I
wanted an informed debate, you just turned it into one anyway by chucking
round playground insult words and phrases.

The points at issue seems to be these:

The misuse of computers act does not apply to publicly acessible webpages
- it is the use the info on those pages is put to after it is obtained
that is at issue.

The T&C's published on websites saying "personal use ok business use not"
are a grey area.

Database right applies if large chunks of a database are copied and
re-used. Screen scraping is another grey area however.

Copyright doesn't cover public domain information, such as a businesses
name address and phone number.

On a practical note and leaving aside the legality, morals etc I've just
recieved another quote for a 5000 record dataset containing 40+ fields
which makes screen-scraping, filtering, cleaning and verifying look like
hard work anyway. Monthly updates to the data too.

 

http://chrrris.googlepages.com/home

Which one is number 2 again? I don't really want to get this wrong.

 

A question of clarification then. Say someone (purely hypothetically)
trawled web sites using search engines for the name of a piece of
software, and having found reference to it, in perhaps the published
minutes of a local authority committee meeting, made a list of said
LA's. If then, by what ever means, an email shot was directed at said
list would that be misuse of information?
--

+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pete Fisher at Home: |
| Voxan Roadster Moto Guzzi Mille GT/Squire RS3 Gilera Nordwest |
| Gilera GFR Moto Morini 2C/375 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+

 

You're both missing the point; it'd be *funny* [/QUOTE]

but to be serious for just a minute, not for me, if you think it
through.

 

Yes it does. Using the website as the owner intends iwth authorised
under the law, accesing it for purposes of traveling the webserver for
data is not authorised by the owner and therefore breaches the law.

 

the one on the left hand end of that row, with the diagonally parked
dark-coloured car.

 

Pete Fisher wrote

Dunno about the data itself but your use of it would be spam and thus
subject to all known laws. And given that what anti spam laws we have
talk a lot about intent then probably your actions in gathering the data
may be construed as illegal for the purposes of making you like Moriarty
to the jury.

 

Doing research is not illegal.
Neither is spamming unfortunately.

Can't seee it being prosecutable under any of the laws under discussion.

 

"Target acquired and locked. Standby in-flight lavatory purge."

 

God.