Don't think it's unreasonable. They crawled it and made it available in an easy to digest form. You can't take their copy and start distributing it infinitely while paying them for one-time read. Write your crawler, and crawl the web on your own if you want... and give it away!

▲

Loquebantur 2 hours ago | parent [-]

You glaze over the fact, they stole the data to begin with and never recuperate their sources. That's not "reasonable".

They don't make it available "easily" either, they place all kinds of hurdles on it, including you having to pay for stolen goods.

You then go on, equating wildly different situations: on one hand, a multi-billion dollar company, easily able to set up such a scheme. On the other (me representing) the public, regularly anything but destitute.

So no, you're the unreasonable one here. So are they.

▲

sroussey an hour ago | parent [-]

Search engines that obey robots.txt are stealing?

If someone does not want on a search engine index and they say not to index, and then get indexed anyhow is stealing.

But a “please read my content and make available to your users” then claim doing so is stealing seems a bit out there.

What am I missing?

	▲	BrenBarn 20 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		There is a difference between "read my content and make it available to your users" and "make money by reading my content and making it available to your users". Terms of use like this are trying to say "we are the only ones who get to make money from this", and therein lies the problem.