This right here folks. This is how I would prefer government worked. Imagine putting the liability back on the corporation for confirming access because in place "protocols" that approved it?
I recall seeing in the wild an HTTP User Agent string that included a EULA for the server stating essentially that they, not the client, were on the hook for any BS if they failed to immediately close the connection.
IANAL but, uh, seems legit... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yep, you two are correct. Like ct0 said, companies are currently saying "We are saying 'come in' to bots but we want to pursue them legally as well."
Exactly.
The bot says "GET /blah" and LinkedIn says "200 OK".