While the laws protecting physical property are long established and reinforced by considerable numbers of court rulings, the laws governing virtual property and virtual behavior are less mature and constantly evolving. While one would think the same laws should protect both online and offline property, the reality is that most laws were written before the Internet and don't directly address those things that are unique to it, like email, frames, hyperlinks, or blogs. Since many existing laws do not specifically address the Internet, the application of the law (as it applies to the Internet) is open to much interpretation.
One example of a law to deal specifically with Internet abuse is Virginia's so-called Anti-Spam Law.[90] This law is a response to the large amount of server resources consumed by servicing unwanted email. The law attacks spammers indirectly by declaring it a felony to falsify or forge email addresses in connection to unsolicited email. It also provides penalties of as much as $10.00 per unsolicited email or $25,000 per day. Laws like this one are required to address specific Internet-related concerns. Well-defined rules, like those imposed by Virginia's Anti-Spam Law, are frequently difficult to derive from existing statutes. And while it may be possible to prosecute a spammer with laws drafted before the popularity of the Internet, less is open to the court's interpretation when the law deals specifically with the offense.
When contemplating the laws that apply to you as a webbot developer, consider the following:
Webbots and spiders add a wrinkle to the way online information is used, as most web pages are intended to be used with manually operated browsers. For example, disputes may arise when webbots ignore paid advertising and disrupt the intended business model of a website. Webmasters, however, usually want some webbots (such as search engine crawlers) to visit their sites.
The Internet is still relatively young and there are few precedents for online law. Existing intellectual property law doesn't always apply well to the Internet. For example, in the Kelly v. Arriba Soft case, which we discussed earlier, there was serious contention over whether or not a website has the right to link to other web pages. The opportunity to challenge (and regulate) hyper-references to media belonging to someone else didn't exist before the Internet.
New laws governing online commerce and intellectual property rights are constantly introduced as the Internet evolves and people conduct themselves in different ways. For example, blogs have recently created a number of legal questions. Are bloggers publishers? Are bloggers responsible for posts made by visitors to their websites? The answer to both questions is no—at least for now.[91]
It is always wise for webbot developers to stay current with online laws, since old laws are constantly being tested and new laws are being written to address specific issues.
The strategies people use to violate as well as protect online intellectual property are constantly changing. For example, pay per click advertising, a process in which companies only pay for ads that people click, has spawned the arrival of so-called clickbots, which simulate people clicking ads to generate revenue for the owner of the website carrying the advertisements. People test the law again by writing webbots that stuff the ballot boxes of online polls and contests. In response to the threat mounted by new webbot designs, web developers counter with technologies like CAPTCHA devices,[92] which force people to type text from an image (or complete some other task that would be similarly difficult for webbots) before accessing a website. There may be as many prospects for webbot developers to create methods to block webbots as there are opportunities to write webbots.
Laws vary from country to country. And since websites can be hosted by servers anywhere the world, it can be difficult to identify—let alone prosecute—the violator of a law when the offender operates from a country that doesn't honor other countries' laws.
[90] "SB 881 Computer Crimes Act; electronic mail," Virginia Senate, approved March 29, 1999 (http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?991+sum+SB881).
[91] In 2006 a Pennsylvania court ruled that bloggers are not responsible for comments posted to the blog by their readers; to read a PDF of the judge's opinion, visit http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/06D0657P.pdf
[92] More information about CAPTCHA devices is available in Chapter 27.