The court case (Field v. Google) was only in the district of Nevada. It doesn't apply to all of the US, and it doesn't apply to people outside of the US. Christian Seibold Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. ??????? Original Message ??????? On Thursday, November 26th, 2020 at 1:32 AM, Bj?rn W?rmedal <bjorn.warmedal at gmail.com> wrote: > > > Google's "cached" pages system is essentially an archive under a different name. Is it truly a leap of logic if even a court of law comes to the same decision? > > > > Yes, the court clearly made a leap in logic. Courts don't always follow logic, > > > > because it's not efficient to do so. > > Courts don't always follow logic, but they often follow precedent. > > > Anyways, if I find any site archiving any of the stuff from my server, I'll be > > > > looking into DMCA takedowns, because I don't tolerate utter disrespect for users' > > > > content like that. It's disgusting. > > And a DMCA takedown notice is a legal measure, which needs a legal > > footing. And it would get that by using robots.txt files as > > established in precedent.
---
Previous in thread (52 of 70): 🗣️ Björn Wärmedal (bjorn.warmedal (a) gmail.com)
Next in thread (54 of 70): 🗣️ Robert "khuxkm" Miles (khuxkm (a) tilde.team)