Matt Cutts brought up an interesting point about the Google Terms of Service.
Basically that scraping them is against their Terms of Service.
Most websites these days have some type of TOS but I've never heard of one actually being enforced. I know that if you're being a good guy and all you'd probably follow the TOS.
I've always looked at the TOS as a request - not as a legal document.
Your comments?
G-Man
Edit: Here's an interesting snippet from the Google TOS:
You may not use the Google Services to sell a product or service, or to increase traffic to your Web site for commercial reasons, such as advertising sales.
I wonder how many are breaking that bit :)
Man talk about a great TOS check this out, not linked on purpose
h**p://www.bostonschoolofelectrolysis.com/terms.php
Michael - I think that got Dugg by a friend of ours :)
I have go to google engine search bluetooth manufacturer, got result almost is professional B2B site on google first page . what is happen?is Goolge TrustRank cause the result? is TrustRank endow to B2B site higher TrustRank? so person site get a good rank (top 10) will very difficult?
Now that your post is somewhat back up my boycott is over (it was a joke anyhow).
Going on: my TOS says that all search engines must contact me if they want to scrape/index my sites, but they aren't listening. I shouldn't have to be proactive to stop them, it should be by invite only. They disobey me, I disobey them.
Try: User-agent: googlebot Disallow: / All the elements are there. As for spammers, I doubt: User-agent: spamming-scum-bag-thief Disallow: / Would work. Again, the point isn't that he spammed even. I just don't see the point out of vilifying her in public on a corporate blog. It's gratuitously mean. Jaimie Sirovich SEO Egghead dot Com
Made for AdSense pages are rife and Google makes a ton of money from them. That particular policy is right up there with the 55MPH speed limit for the most ignored/least enforced policy ever created.
As for the G-Man issue, can we move on now?
Google for "browsewrap" for more information on this. Browsewrapped terms of use contracts have indeed been enforced. eBay was involved in one of the cases. It's basically garden variety contract law, nothing really new. But each case is considered on its facts.
Browsewrapped contracts can be used even to protect material that is not subject to copyright, such as facts. Browsewrapping is simply an extension of shrinkwrapped contracts used by software and database licensers. "Clickwrapping" was the first technique used on the net, but courts have acknowledged that the requiring an acknowledging click is not really practical for consumer web sites in all cases.
In addition tort law can be invoked, for instance trespass of chattals.
Disclaimer 1: I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV, or the internet, and am most likely talking out of my @ss. In fact the only person less qualified than myself to give legal advice would be a drunken residence challenged individual wandering through the men's room of Grand Central station between the hours of 2am and 4am EDST.
Disclaimer 2: I don't advocate or recommend testing anything against the google legal team. IMHO that would be the equivalent of mosquito going facing a fully loaded 18 wheel truck coming downhill in a snowstorm. You'd end up looking like a jackson pollock painting.
One could argue since there is already a large amount of scraping already going on and nothing has been done about it, a precedence has already been set.
Secondly if I was to add something to my terms and service page how would you know you agreed with it until you visited my site? What if I turned caching off? What if it was something that had no monetary value such as requiring a link to my site with the anchor text of my choosing if you had a site above a PR4 (cause we all know you can't sell page rank)?
I'm with you g-man, I treat them like they are the rules. If I break 'em I can get tossed, but not much else happen.