Hacker News Reader

Comment by theBobBob | Hacker News Reader

This might be a somewhat unpopular opinion but I think that there should be some way (definitely not through criminal prosecution) for a website or similar to say "You can use my service for free, but only under the following restrictions". Not sure what the "punishment" should be for breaking these rules.

View on HN

If you don't like a user's request then don't service it and tell them why. You owe them nothing.

A simple 403 FORBIDDEN probably covers it. Or 429 TOO MANY REQUESTS might be appropriate. More bluntly, 204 NO CONTENT exists to tell your client, "I heard you just fine and I have nothing to say to you." Or there's 509 BANDWIDTH LIMIT EXCEEDED.

In any case, the protocols exist to give your client some constructive information in your refusal.

e: sp

That only deals with types of requests, or the user making the request etc. It doesn't do anything about how the requested data/info etc is used. I suppose it is closer to a licence agreement. I don't think that there can be any technical way to enforce it only some sort of legal way.

Yes. Technology to restrict usage sounds a lot like DRM, which has many downsides. Enforcement, ultimately, will rely on good old fashioned copyright and licensing (contract) law.

That is how it works but punishment under civil law is based on damages so there is no punishment if there are no damages even if found guilty of breaching the TOS.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com