Disappointing in particular to see the court validate a ToS "browsewrap agreement", admitting that OCLC provided no evidence that Anna's Archive was aware of the agreement, but still finding the fact that "Defendant is a sophisticated party that scraped data from Plaintiffs website daily" as sufficient to bind them to it.

shakna 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Can that be used as precedent to bind the AI companies that see themselves getting blocked, and then just switch to residential IPs?

	▲	perihelions 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> "used as precedent" It's only a default judgement (Anna's Archive was a no-show in court), so I'd assume not. Since there were no lawyers arguing the defense side, the judge would have more or less rubber-stamped everything the plaintiff argued, without careful analysis.