| |
| ▲ | snowwrestler 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Not sure if joking, but if this product is not republishing the text of your contributions (to which you hold copyright), you’re probably not going to convince a court to do anything here. Generally speaking it is not a violation to scrape, index, and analyze web content as long as you don’t republish copyrighted content without a license, or violate access controls. For example: search engine indexes. | |
| ▲ | linmer 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Wait, so I have to ask for every single person's permissions to use this data? uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh | |
| ▲ | moralestapia 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | By uploading any User Content you hereby grant and will grant Y Combinator and its affiliated companies a nonexclusive, worldwide, royalty free, fully paid up, transferable, sublicensable, perpetual, irrevocable license to copy, display, upload, perform, distribute, store, modify and otherwise use your User Content for any Y Combinator-related purpose in any form, medium or technology now known or later developed. @zX41ZdbW, you can safely ignore this guy. @GeoAtreides, next time read the actual terms of service before hallucinating. | | |
| ▲ | codingdave 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > for any Y Combinator-related purpose That is actually the key phrase. HN can provide the API, no problem. People can consume the API, no problem.. But I'd ask an attorney if API consumers can then re-release the data for purposes not related to YC. By my reading, they cannot. | | |
| ▲ | moralestapia 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | You might want to read it again, then: https://opensource.org/license/mit | | |
| ▲ | codingdave 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | That is about the software, not the data. | | |
| ▲ | moralestapia an hour ago | parent [-] | | While a literal reading of the MIT license refers to "software", many datasets have been released under it. In particular, if someone releases something that is only a dataset along with an MIT license file, the most reasonable interpretation is that the rights holder intended to release the data under the terms of that license. I looked for copyright cases involving this specific distinction, whether "data" versus "software" makes a legal difference, but didn’t find anything. So the question remains open (for you, for me it's pretty clear the dataset is released under MIT). You might want to sue and find out. It sounds like an interesting experiment. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | GeoAtreides 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >Y Combinator and its affiliated companies is zX41ZdbW either? | | |
| |
| ▲ | pelagicAustral 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You must be fun at parties |
|
