- 5,778
Running Insurance Tool kits... happy.
Quoting Software Tools??
- Thread starter moxieagent007
- Start date
Moses Newman
New Member
- 4
somarco,
With people like yourself living there en masse it is no wonder the cognitively challenged populous there are stupid enough to believe that Joe Biden won the election in GA.
"Yes, Your Honor, I did in fact break into the home and stole property that was not mine. But if the owner had not made it so easy for me to get in I would not have been tempted. So it was the owners fault, not mine"
Otherwise known as "The devil made me do it" defense . . .
Since cognitive ability is not your strongpoint (if it was insurance would not be your business), allow me to explain.
Web scraping IS NOT AND NEVER WAS illegal. Walking into someone's home uninvited for any purpose IS, even if the door is unlocked.
Assuming you can function at a high enough level to order a plane ticket and/or book a hotel, I assume you have used and still use discount sites like booking.com, trivago, cheapoair, cheptickets, Priceline etc. Without web scraping (yes I know that now they are all mature sites and huge conglomerates they are fed rates by the companies they list) there would be NO such discount air fare and hotel sites in existence period. Scarping is not illegal when the data is public domain (let's not forget that Barney's database if you can actually call it that, contains no quotes! It builds them), the quotes themselves are not protectable by copyright or trade secret protections. You can't use businesses like the ones I mentioned, or buy car insurance from a company like Progressive (that advertised their web scraping for years), then post an asinine childish comment like that on here. I know on an insurance forum we aren't going to get the smartest people in the room, but this is even below the standards of that industry.
The prevailing case law since the internet existed was the case of Rural Telphone vs. Feist. The case was that a small yellow page publisher (Rural Telephone) publish a phone directory that contained all 4000 people in another competitor's phone book. Rural Telephone admitted to copying all 4000 people and addresses and using the information to create their directory. The ruling was since the entries are all public domain information Rural Telephone was not committing any trade secret or copyright infringement and therefore the court ruled against the plaintiffs.
In this asinine ruling the halfwits on the 11th circuit and the prevailing judge dug up the 50 year old case of E.I. DuPont deNemours & Co. V. Christopher were Chritoper (Dupont's competition) vued a trade secret by flying a chartered plane over the Dupont factory and viewing the trade secret operation via a hole in Dupont roof. The argument then was that only the exorbitantly wealthy (in 1970) could afford a plane or even to hire one to do such a thing, so it was the same as if they actually broke into the factory and viewed the trade secret that way. Of course today you don't have to be a multi-millionaire to charter a Cessna and pilot for a few hours. The asinine ruling the 11th circuit rocket scientists and this judge went with is that the number of items scraped to determine if an ordinary person could do the scrape or not (an assinine ruling because you don't have to know anything about computers to scrape web data, there are software vendors that make it easy and ***-proof don't forget Dav.d Rutst..n is an *** and he pulled this off). They used B.b's criminal fraud of a fake expert to lie (she testified she never looked at NA.IP's database was provided to her and lied about the scrape in question taking 43,000,000 quotes when the actual database in question had only 3 million records in it. They also failed to specify what percentage of a database (hard to do in this case because the so-called database from comp. Life does not contain actual quotes) must be taken before they consider the act a trespass and illegal entry into a system. This is a ruling that will surely be negated by the Supreme court when it gets there, or even a lower court when another crooked IP attorney attempts to use this ruling the same way. Testimony in the appellate trial revealed that the C-life database was capable of generating over 1 "Trillion quotes". Three million hardly seems like a large portion of over 1 trillion to me. Also, again the prevailing case law for the last 30+ years is the Feist vs. Rural Telephone ruling in which case it is safe to assume if you are scraping public domain data, there is NO limit on the number of records you can take, so it becomes the burden of the database owner to take reasonable steps in securing their data (remember at the time of this scrape there where no protections whatsoever, and the ones that are in place even now are woefully inadequate). The ruling is ridiculous not only because it used the number of quotes (which the Plaintiff did not know and simply lied about it) was something an ordinary person could not do. The second point of idiocy was assuming (and the 11th circuit made the assumptions that a database in it's entirety is automatically a "Trade Secret", so that the scraper software was the equivalent of the charter plane in 1970, and the quotes themselves the "Trade Secret".
With people like yourself living there en masse it is no wonder the cognitively challenged populous there are stupid enough to believe that Joe Biden won the election in GA.
"Yes, Your Honor, I did in fact break into the home and stole property that was not mine. But if the owner had not made it so easy for me to get in I would not have been tempted. So it was the owners fault, not mine"
Otherwise known as "The devil made me do it" defense . . .
Since cognitive ability is not your strongpoint (if it was insurance would not be your business), allow me to explain.
Web scraping IS NOT AND NEVER WAS illegal. Walking into someone's home uninvited for any purpose IS, even if the door is unlocked.
Assuming you can function at a high enough level to order a plane ticket and/or book a hotel, I assume you have used and still use discount sites like booking.com, trivago, cheapoair, cheptickets, Priceline etc. Without web scraping (yes I know that now they are all mature sites and huge conglomerates they are fed rates by the companies they list) there would be NO such discount air fare and hotel sites in existence period. Scarping is not illegal when the data is public domain (let's not forget that Barney's database if you can actually call it that, contains no quotes! It builds them), the quotes themselves are not protectable by copyright or trade secret protections. You can't use businesses like the ones I mentioned, or buy car insurance from a company like Progressive (that advertised their web scraping for years), then post an asinine childish comment like that on here. I know on an insurance forum we aren't going to get the smartest people in the room, but this is even below the standards of that industry.
The prevailing case law since the internet existed was the case of Rural Telphone vs. Feist. The case was that a small yellow page publisher (Rural Telephone) publish a phone directory that contained all 4000 people in another competitor's phone book. Rural Telephone admitted to copying all 4000 people and addresses and using the information to create their directory. The ruling was since the entries are all public domain information Rural Telephone was not committing any trade secret or copyright infringement and therefore the court ruled against the plaintiffs.
In this asinine ruling the halfwits on the 11th circuit and the prevailing judge dug up the 50 year old case of E.I. DuPont deNemours & Co. V. Christopher were Chritoper (Dupont's competition) vued a trade secret by flying a chartered plane over the Dupont factory and viewing the trade secret operation via a hole in Dupont roof. The argument then was that only the exorbitantly wealthy (in 1970) could afford a plane or even to hire one to do such a thing, so it was the same as if they actually broke into the factory and viewed the trade secret that way. Of course today you don't have to be a multi-millionaire to charter a Cessna and pilot for a few hours. The asinine ruling the 11th circuit rocket scientists and this judge went with is that the number of items scraped to determine if an ordinary person could do the scrape or not (an assinine ruling because you don't have to know anything about computers to scrape web data, there are software vendors that make it easy and ***-proof don't forget Dav.d Rutst..n is an *** and he pulled this off). They used B.b's criminal fraud of a fake expert to lie (she testified she never looked at NA.IP's database was provided to her and lied about the scrape in question taking 43,000,000 quotes when the actual database in question had only 3 million records in it. They also failed to specify what percentage of a database (hard to do in this case because the so-called database from comp. Life does not contain actual quotes) must be taken before they consider the act a trespass and illegal entry into a system. This is a ruling that will surely be negated by the Supreme court when it gets there, or even a lower court when another crooked IP attorney attempts to use this ruling the same way. Testimony in the appellate trial revealed that the C-life database was capable of generating over 1 "Trillion quotes". Three million hardly seems like a large portion of over 1 trillion to me. Also, again the prevailing case law for the last 30+ years is the Feist vs. Rural Telephone ruling in which case it is safe to assume if you are scraping public domain data, there is NO limit on the number of records you can take, so it becomes the burden of the database owner to take reasonable steps in securing their data (remember at the time of this scrape there where no protections whatsoever, and the ones that are in place even now are woefully inadequate). The ruling is ridiculous not only because it used the number of quotes (which the Plaintiff did not know and simply lied about it) was something an ordinary person could not do. The second point of idiocy was assuming (and the 11th circuit made the assumptions that a database in it's entirety is automatically a "Trade Secret", so that the scraper software was the equivalent of the charter plane in 1970, and the quotes themselves the "Trade Secret".
Last edited:
Just admit it... You lost to Barney..
- 24,978
Where did the Canada man touch you?
- 1,405
At a moment in time, when Mr. Newman's lawyer (the one paid for by David and his son's insurance company) told the judge that she wasn't sure that she still represented Mr. Newman, I contacted Mr. Newman and invited him to testify on behalf of Compulife. I indicated I would be open to settling with him if he simply told the truth when it was clear to me that he had not been doing so to that point.
Mr. Newman then said he would consider doing so if I agreed to pay him the money that David owed him, something I would not have done. However, before we could communicate further, David's lawyer told the judge that she now represented Mr. Newman and I was then admonished by the judge to have NO further communication with Mr. Newman, something that I have abided by.
Mr. Newman gives the impression that he was sucked into David's side by David's fraud, but it seems to me that Mr. Newman was quite a willing participant, right up until the case went badly for him and his partners.
So Moses and David are not one and the same as was one time assumed to be?
- 29,491
Just admit it... You lost to Barney..
- 1,405
So Moses and David are not one and the same as was one time assumed to be?
Not this time. While David likes to assume other people's identities, and publish information using those identities (he currently uses his daughter Mindy), Moses is a different person and I think it is actually Moses who has made these postings. The jargon is not David.
- 29,491
