D.C. Federal Court Rules That Web Scraping Does Not Violate The CFAA And May Be Protected By The First Amendment

Author:Mr Mark Francis
Profession:Reed Smith
 
FREE EXCERPT

On March 30, 2018, a D.C. federal district court denied a motion to dismiss an ACLU case filed against the government to challenge the constitutionality of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), which makes it a federal crime to access a computer in a manner that "exceeds authorized access." Sandvig v. Sessions, No. 1:16-cv-01368, Dkt. 24 (D.D.C. Mar. 30, 2018). The court held that the plaintiffs could proceed with their claim that the Free Speech and Free Press Clauses of the First Amendment, as applied, bar prosecution under the CFAA because it would restrict the plaintiffs' ability to report on publicly available information, and even information available only following user registration on a site is generally available to the public.

The particular facts of the Sandvig case are unsurprisingly aimed at highlighting a potentially extreme application of the CFAA. The named plaintiffs are four professors and a media organization investigating whether automated decision-making and ad targeting technologies employed by various websites would result in potentially discriminatory practices against protected classes. For example, they want to analyze whether a real estate or employment website would discriminate against a user based on race. To perform the necessary analysis, they intend to use web scraping, bots, fake accounts ("sock puppets") and other data collection techniques to conduct outcomes-based audit testing of websites and uncover such practices. These activities are typically prohibited by websites' terms of service (TOS) and therefore unauthorized activity.

Federal circuit courts are currently divided on whether individuals who violate a website TOS in such a manner could be prosecuted under the "access provision" of the CFAA, which provides that anyone who "intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains ... information from any protected computer" may be fined and imprisoned. 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2)(C). In Sandvig, the court sided with the Second, Fourth and Ninth Circuits, which...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP