Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by gkya 1795 days ago
> DMCA/copyright doesn't cover other people's tools

That is probably exactly why they are doing this. They lack the legal grounds to slience, so they instead opt for the feral means.
1 comments
hannasanarion 1795 days ago
They absolutely have the legal grounds: the CFAA. Unauthorized use of a computer system is a crime.
link
antisol 1795 days ago
what unauthorised use?
link
Ygg2 1795 days ago
Any use that doesn't sit well with whoever wrote EULA.
link
antisol 1794 days ago
Aah.

And how do they specify which access is authorised/unauthorised in their HTTP responses? How can we determine programmatically which use is unauthorised?

link
antisol 1794 days ago
Oh nevermind, I figured out the answer to my question: If the server responds with a 401 code, it's unauthorised. It's right there in the spec. Duh.
link
hannasanarion 1790 days ago
No, you didn't.

HTTP status codes are not legally binding. EULAs are.

Saying "if the status code isn't 401 then I'm authorized" is like saying "if the door opens, I'm allowed to enter". "Able to" and "allowed to" are not the same thing, especially when you were only "able" because you ignored DO NOT ENTER signs and picked locks.

The fact that you managed to defeat or bypass security measures intended to block you doesn't magically make your behavior legal.

link