224
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2024
224 points (100.0% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54443 readers
268 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
5M to protect against scraping? That sounds... a bit much, no? 34 employees with that one task for 2 years doesn't sound believable to me. Why is WorldCat worth anything anyway?
Anti Commercial-AI license
It was 2.2 TB that is nothing...
Seriously... I've downloaded 2TB in a week before.
I get that it's not about the bandwidth, though; it's about needing to upgrade their security since they scraped the site without needing to log in, so obviously their site wasn't secure. They're claiming IT costs as damages.
They should have had security in place beforehand if they didn't want people to scrape their site. If AA hadn't done it someone else would have. Don't make it public if you don't want people to use it.
Just set a torrent size of 10tb and hit go. I'll move that to permanent storage when it's done.
Also calling “improving it security” damages is kind of misleading. No its not damages, you just actually got some IT security for once
but now they can (try to) make someone else pay for it!
They should have been able to put a stop to the scraping very quickly. It's not that hard to block or rate limit IPs that are causing excessive load.