Running an automated process to access someone's
computer in a way that
they clearly don't allow is not a good idea.
European database laws are also really on the fact that a protected
database copy is a copy, whatever the copy process is. Does not matter if
an automated process took place or if a crowd take facts one by one, once
there is a significant portion of the datas copied (whatever that means)
there is a juridical risk.
2014-09-22 3:37 GMT+02:00 Anthony <ok(a)theendput.com>om>:
> On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> <https://developers.google.com/books/terms>
>> Moreover, the Google ToS are very clear in forbidding any activity which
>> would result in you having a copy of their database/of the data the API
>> provides access to, IIRC even in form of a cache. However, you only want
>> ISBN? *If* you care about respecting your contract with Google, it may
>> be wise to directly ask them if they're ok with it.
>>
>
> Might be wise in any case:
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Aaron_Swartz
>
Running an automated process to access someone's
computer in a way that
> they clearly don't allow is not a good idea.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata-l mailing list
> Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
>
>