[coldpie]

> Bots used to purchase inventory are not malicious.

There's no way you're in this conversation without being aware that scalping is a controversial practice at best.

https://theconversation.com/the-economics-of-ticket-scalping...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ticket_scalping

[ikeboy]

I'm well aware that many economically illiterate people like to scaremonger about scalping.

That doesn't make them right.

[coldpie]

Or perhaps they are interested in optimizing the process for something different than what you are optimizing for.

[ikeboy]

Maybe I'd believe that if they stopped saying things like scalping harms the producer, and acknowledged that they want a less efficient market.

[JakeTheAndroid]

if a single bot controller can buy up an entire stock of limited items legitimately, that is malicious as that company is not longer able to meet the needs of their consumers. That's bad for the company.

[ikeboy]

If it's profitable for anyone to resell, that implies the company priced below the market price and there would be a shortage without scalpers. So the company is unable to meet the needs of its customers in any event. Scalpers just make it somewhat more efficient.

[judge2020]

It is illegal if the website’s TOS for making a purchase prohibits the use of automated software.

It doesn't matter if it's legal, it matters if the website owner doesn't want x doing y on their site. A bot consistently not abiding by owners' intent is inheritly malicious.

[ikeboy]

What law does using a bot to make a purchase against ToS violate?

The LinkedIn case shows that it's not illegal in some cases - would you classify the behavior of the defendant in that case as malicious?