Skip to content

[R-pkg-devel] Pkgs with ToS violations

7 messages · Dirk Eddelbuettel, Peter Dalgaard, Duncan Murdoch +3 more

Original
Bob Rudis
# 
I came across https://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/boxoffice/index.html
in CRAN today and while I don't expect CRAN to be a legal authority,
should there not be some kind of policy for excluding R packages that
deliberately violate (data) site ToS? (I'm asking this here vs sending
a note to CRAN folks since I tend to be a bit sensitive to this
particular issue).

Box Office Mojo - which is really just Amazon - clearly states that
the activities this package facilitates are in violation of their ToS.
Unlike examples on blogs that also violate BOM ToS, this pkg in CRAN
is almost legitimizing the violations.

Amazon only goes after a few folks a year and it's unlikely R folks
will be their target (for now) but that doesn't make it OK IMO.

Is this worth bringing up to CRAN?
Dirk Eddelbuettel
#
On 3 August 2016 at 22:26, Bob Rudis wrote:
| I came across https://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/boxoffice/index.html
| in CRAN today and while I don't expect CRAN to be a legal authority,
| should there not be some kind of policy for excluding R packages that
| deliberately violate (data) site ToS? (I'm asking this here vs sending
| a note to CRAN folks since I tend to be a bit sensitive to this
| particular issue).
| 
| Box Office Mojo - which is really just Amazon - clearly states that
| the activities this package facilitates are in violation of their ToS.
| Unlike examples on blogs that also violate BOM ToS, this pkg in CRAN
| is almost legitimizing the violations.
| 
| Amazon only goes after a few folks a year and it's unlikely R folks
| will be their target (for now) but that doesn't make it OK IMO.
| 
| Is this worth bringing up to CRAN?

I think so.

Dirk
Peter Dalgaard
#
On 04 Aug 2016, at 05:21 , Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd at debian.org> wrote:

            

      
      
      
    

        
By all means bring it up. But there's the usual tools-vs-action discussion, and I do notice that the ToS has

? Licensing IMDb's Content; Consent to Use Robots and Crawlers: If you are interested in receiving our express written permission to use our content for your non-personal (including commercial) use, please contact our Licensing Department. We do allow the limited use of robots and crawlers, such as those from certain search engines, with our express written consent. 

I.e., it could be a matter of suitable flagging of the software as requiring permission. You likely don't wnat CRAN to run automated tests that run scrapers, though.

-pd

            

      
      
      
    

        

      
      
    

        

  
    

      
      
    

  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Duncan Murdoch
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
On 03/08/2016 10:26 PM, Bob Rudis wrote:

            

      
      
      
    

        
I'd say the place to start is the package maintainer.  The maintainer 
has certified that the package satisfies the policy "The code and 
examples provided in a package should never do anything which might be 
regarded as malicious or anti-social.".

Duncan Murdoch

  
  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Uwe Ligges
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
CRAN will follow up with the package maintainer.

Best,
Uwe Ligges

        
On 04.08.2016 10:50, peter dalgaard wrote:

            

      
      
      
    

        

      
      
    

            

      
      
      
    

  
  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Barry Rowlingson
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
ROpenSci's onboarding process has a checkbox for confirming that the
package "does not violate the Terms of Service of any service it
interacts with.":

https://github.com/ropensci/onboarding/blob/master/issue_template.md

I also have a vague memory of this discussion a few years ago on
R-help/-dev where TPTB on CRAN decided that they were just providing
hammers, and if people wanted to break into houses with them then that
wasn't their problem (I'm paraphrasing and vague on the details...).
Can't find that thread right now.




On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Duncan Murdoch

        
<murdoch.duncan at gmail.com> wrote:

            

      
      
      
    

        

      
      
    

  
  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Bob Rudis
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
Thx folks. I didn't mean to cause a stir :-)

I've had colleagues receive cease & desists (and worse) before and
it's been my experience that a large # of folks have no idea these
type of cite restrictions exist.

-Bob

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Uwe Ligges

        
<ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de> wrote: