[1] strongly implies that Gfycat has no legal leg to stand on, that scraping is legal, and that the ridiculous "you specifically are forbidden from accessing things we make publicly available to everyone else" is not binding.
And if I, with no legal training, know about this precedent, then why the hell do we tolerate lawyers making threats they should know have no legal standing? At that point, you're not practicing law - you're a scam artist and extortionist, trying to misrepresent the law for personal profit.
And if I, with no legal training, know about this precedent, then why the hell do we tolerate lawyers making threats they should know have no legal standing? At that point, you're not practicing law - you're a scam artist and extortionist, trying to misrepresent the law for personal profit.
[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2019/09/10/linke...