964 F. Supp. 2d 1178
N.D. Cal.2013Background
- Craigslist sued 3Taps for scraping its publicly accessible website, posting alleged real-time copying of Craigslist content.
- Craigslist sent a cease-and-desist letter prohibiting 3Taps from accessing its site and blocked 3Taps by IP address filters.
- 3Taps continued scraping by using different IPs and proxies to circumvent the blocks.
- The court previously found Craigslist’s allegations stated a CFAA claim; the current issue is whether access without authorization can be limited on a case-by-case basis.
- The court evaluates the plain text of the CFAA, Ninth Circuit interpretations, and relevant legislative history to decide if selective revocation of access is permissible.
- 3Taps argues Nosal narrows the CFAA, while Craigslist argues owners may revoke access; the court ultimately declines to adopt 3Taps’ restriction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Craigslist could revoke authorization to access its public website for a specific entity under the CFAA | Craigslist asserts owners may revoke access on a case-by-case basis | 3Taps contends no such selective revocation is possible under the CFAA | Denied; Craigslist may revoke access; continued access after revocation is 'without authorization' |
| Whether Nosal limits the scope of 'exceeds authorized access' to private-use restrictions rather than access restrictions | Nosal narrows CFAA beyond broad access prohibitions | Nosal does not apply to complete access bans on a public website | Denied; Nosal does not defeat a case where access is barred via explicit revocation and blocking |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Brekka, 581 F.3d 1127 (9th Cir. 2009) (authorization depends on the granting authority)
- United States v. Nosal, 676 F.3d 854 (9th Cir. 2012) (exceeds authorized access limits use restrictions, not access restrictions)
- Pulte Homes, Inc. v. Laborers' Int'l Union of N. Am., 648 F.3d 295 (6th Cir. 2011) (publicly accessible website authorizations; dicta on authorization issue not argued by plaintiff)
- LVRC Holdings LLC v. Brekka, 581 F.3d 1127 (9th Cir. 2009) (affirmed plain-language interpretation of 'without authorization' and agency-like authority)