• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I hope not, laws tend to get outdated real fast. Who knows robots.txt might not even be used in the future and it just there adding space because of law reasons.

    • jackeryjoo
      link
      fedilink
      English
      121 year ago

      You can describe the law in a similar way to a specification, and you can make it as broad as needed. Something like the file name shouldn’t ever come up as an issue.

    • Echo Dot
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      We don’t need new laws we just need enforcement of existing laws. It is already illegal to copy copyrighted content, it’s just that the AI companies do it anyway and no one does anything about it.

      Enforcing respect for robots.txt doesn’t matter because the AI companies are already breaking the law.

        • Echo Dot
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          Copyright law in general needs changing though that’s the real problem. I don’t see the advantage of legally mandating that a hacky workaround solution becomes a legally mandated requirement.

          Especially because there are many many legitimate reasons to ignore robots.txt including it being misconfigured or it just been set up for search engines when your bot isn’t a search engine crawler.

    • kingthrillgore
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      robots.txt has been an unofficial standard for 30 years and its augmented with sitemap.xml to help index uncrawlable pages, and Schema.org to expose contents for Semantic Web. I’m not stating it shouldn’t not be a law, but to suggest changing norms as a reason is a pretty weak counterargument, man.