Scraping or collecting data from social media sites like Facebook raises complex legal issues. While sites like Facebook want to control how their data is used, scraping for personal or research purposes may be allowed under certain circumstances. Understanding the legal landscape is important for anyone considering scraping Facebook data.
What is web scraping?
Web scraping refers to extracting data from websites through automated means like bots or scrapers instead of manually copying and pasting. Scrapers can rapidly pull large amounts of data from public websites.
Many legitimate reasons exist to scrape data from sites like Facebook. Businesses may want to analyze trends and sentiment or collect social media marketing data. Academic researchers may want to study patterns and connections in large datasets. Personal users may want to create archives of their own profiles and posts. Scraping can quickly pull needed data that would take an impractical amount of time to gather manually.
Copyright law and scraping
Copyright protects original creative works like writing, images, videos, and other content. Websites contain copyrighted content, so scraping raises copyright questions.
Copyright law gives owners control over reproduction and distribution of their work. Scraping involves making copies, which would typically require permission from the copyright holder. However, copyright also has limits and exceptions allowing certain uses without permission.
Fair use
The fair use doctrine permits unauthorized copying for certain purposes like criticism, commentary, news reporting, research, and scholarship. Fair use is evaluated based on factors like:
- The purpose and character of the use
- The nature of the copyrighted work
- The amount copied
- The market effect on the copyrighted work
Noncommercial research scraping a reasonable portion of a site likely qualifies as fair use. But extensive copying exceeding research needs may not be sufficiently fair.
Implied license
Websites often use Terms of Service prohibiting scraping. However, simply viewing a public website likely creates an implied license to copy and store content for personal use thanks to the Ninth Circuit’s hiQ v. LinkedIn decision.
Scraping public data for research consistent with academic norms may also avoid copyright liability under the implied license theory.
Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) prohibits unauthorized access to computers. Scraping or exceeding authorization on a website can potentially trigger civil and criminal liability under this law. However, public website access is presumptively authorized, so scraping likely does not violate the CFAA without other factors. Using stolen credentials or circumventing technical barriers could be unauthorized access.
Contract law
Websites frequently use Terms of Service agreements prohibiting scraping. These contract terms are enforceable through breach of contract lawsuits. Avoiding contractual liability requires avoiding the terms by scraping anonymously without creating an account. However, lying to create an account raises fraud and ethics issues. There are no easy answers balancing contract law and other considerations.
Trespass laws
Trespass prohibits unauthorized interference with someone else’s computer system. Scraping could potentially constitute trespass to chattels, triggering liability. However, trespass requires actual harm, not just unwanted access. Regular public scraping likely causes minimal disruption, avoiding trespass liability.
Facebook terms
Here are some key terms in Facebook’s Terms of Service related to scraping:
- By using Facebook, you agree not to “collect users’ content or information, or otherwise access Facebook, using automated means (such as harvesting bots, robots, spiders, or scrapers) without our prior permission.”
- You cannot “attempt to override or circumvent any of the usage rules set forth in the Terms.” This likely prohibits workaround scraping methods.
- You cannot ” scrape the Services without our prior written permission.” Facebook reserves the right to bar violating accounts.
These terms clearly prohibit scraping Facebook without permission. Violating them exposes you to potential breach of contract claims by Facebook. However, these contractual limits likely do not apply to anonymous, non-agreed access.
Facebook’s position on scraping
Facebook’s public position opposes scraping:
- Facebook argues scraping violates their Terms of Service and threatens user privacy and security.
- They recommend the official Facebook API for data access needs.
- Facebook states they “will take action against companies that abuse scraping without proper user consent.”
However, Facebook likely recognizes fair use scraping rights to some degree based on past statements and actions. But in general, Facebook will act against extensive scraping exceeding fair use bounds.
Scraping case law
Key court decisions indicate scraping public information for research purposes may be permissible, but commercial scraping can be barred:
hiQ v. LinkedIn (9th Cir. 2019)
- hiQ scraped public LinkedIn user profiles for data analytics business.
- Court held hiQ could likely claim implied license and free speech rights to scrape public data.
- Blocking scraping was enjoined preliminarily.
Facebook v. Power Ventures (9th Cir. 2016)
- Power Ventures scraped Facebook data after users logged into their accounts.
- Court upheld injunction against Power Ventures for breaching Facebook’s terms.
Sandvig v. Sessions (D.C. Dist. 2016)
- Researchers challenged law prohibiting accessing a website despite authorization limits.
- Court held research scraping of public data would likely be protected First Amendment activity.
These decisions indicate that scraping public data for research may be permissible, but extensive commercial scraping or exceeding access authorization faces greater liability risk.
Scraping best practices
If you want to consider scraping Facebook or other sites, some best practices include:
- Restricting scraping to truly public data
- Scraping minimally for defined research purposes
- Avoiding sharing scraped data beyond research needs
- Making reasonable efforts to anonymize scraping activities
- Following ethics rules like university institutional review boards
Bottom line on legality
Scraping public Facebook comments within scope of fair use rights may avoid liability, but extensive commercial scraping likely faces legal risks. Researchers should evaluate project specifics carefully when considering scraping.
Constitutional considerations
Beyond narrow legal issues, scraping also raises broader constitutional considerations:
First Amendment
Accessing public data that informs free speech has First Amendment implications. Researchers have constitutional interests in receiving public information. So First Amendment protections may cover fair use scraping, as suggested in Sandvig.
Considering scale and consent
However, the scale of modern platforms raises new issues around consent. Should millions lose privacy because they do not lock down public settings? Do publicly shared interests really signal willingness for third-party research use? These are challenging questions requiring nuance in balancing platform, researcher, and user rights.
Evolving expectations
User expectations and norms around public data are also evolving. Early social media users may have embraced radical openness. But today’s context differs greatly. Younger generations express much more concern about privacy and algorithmic research uses. So what users consent to by leaving settings public is debatable.
Overall, while fair use principles may protect defined public interest scraping, that does not resolve complex privacy issues posed by massive datasets online.
Conclusion
Scraping inherently involves tensions between the interests of platforms, researchers, and users. While scraping public data for research purposes may avoid liability, the practice also raises challenging issues around consent, privacy, and evolving norms. Scrapers should thoughtfully consider both narrow legal rights and broader ethical obligations to individuals and society when embarking on projects involving data from platforms like Facebook.