Note that LinkedIn could make this whole issue moot by putting their data behind a login tomorrow. The 9th circuit decision pretty clearly stated that.
The only reason the data is public is for marketing purposes, to sign up more users.
The only reason the data is public is for marketing purposes, to sign up more users.
Is that too much to ask?
I don’t even want to get into what goes on in the mind of a Linked In “influencer”.
I am convinced salvation cannot come from the courts and at the same time Congress has ceded all authority to the White House. The goal for everyone in our industry must be complete abolition of the CFAA but that can’t happen until we can get Congress to act.
As far as I know, there's no reason it couldn't be "Log in to see this profile".
I believe the injunction bars LinkedIn from blocking hiQ specifically from accessing the publicly available information (which again is public by LinkedIn's choice). They made a point to draw a distinction between the public stuff and stuff behind a login/password.