I'd be more OK with this if Google had a good API for their search results. But they've deprecated it, and now there is no alternative. So I'll continue to use 3rd parties that scrape Google results, until they change their mind.
mark_l_watson 36 minutes ago [-]
I agree, then need to bring back Nelson Minar’s old search API, or something like it.
Google does supply search grounding with Gemini API calls, and that is handy, but not general enough.
It's interesting to imagine how the world would be different, if internet advertising giants were partially liable for scams/malware that they facilitate.
asdefghyk 1 minutes ago [-]
I recall a articale I read "somewhere" that reported the Facebook makes big profit from scams. So they have no ( or no strong motive) motive to shut such scams down
cwmoore 9 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
dmix 6 minutes ago [-]
DMCA needs to be reformed one day.
thisislife2 1 hours ago [-]
I am somewhat confused - does this mean we can all now legally scrape Google search results?
rgrieselhuber 57 minutes ago [-]
Always has been
lazide 45 minutes ago [-]
Legally and ‘they won’t do everything they can to stop you’ are not the same thing of course.
xbar 2 hours ago [-]
Hypocrisy-rich.
super256 1 hours ago [-]
If only GPT wouldn't refuse my requests to write a crawler for $site. :(
Imustaskforhelp 9 minutes ago [-]
(IANAL) I think that the deeper thing from this lawsuit is that from my understanding, (inherently) Search engines are considered public indexes and the data (URL's,index) behind it is considered uncopyrighted and as such aren't protected by DMCA because DMCA only works for copyrighted contents and thus the dismissal of the lawsuit by the Judge.
Basically, search engines are publicly scrapable, though I do wonder as from a law point of view, that it must be within the murky waters as to what a search engine means in terms of seperating its search engine code/its recomendation engine and the public data much of which are intertwined with each other.
I believe that the argument that could be made is that the recommendation engine is the way it is because of all the data and its unseperable to really copyright the whole mechanism in all its glory.
Speaking of which, it seems that AI models feel really similar. Does this judge lawsuit show that AI model weights aren't copyrightable as well? If a search engine is built on public indexes then so are the AI models. I was just writing similar comment on another thread but it seems to be the case, definitely worth a blog article or thinking more about perhaps this judgement by this judge itself in general as well, I just have a vibe that this judgement has pretty far reaching consequences in its impact.
beloch 34 minutes ago [-]
This ruling might feel good viscerally, but it also reinforces Googles own scraping as perfectly legal. At its inception, Google probably viewed this lawsuit as win-win. Either they successfully sue a competitor into oblivion or establish a precedent that will protect themselves in the future. Google lost, but they still won.
echelon 27 minutes ago [-]
Google has no moat anymore.
- Google search is on the way out. I don't know any of my peers who use it anymore.
- Coding models make doing extreme depth of work possible.
- Hoards of unemployed engineers now have access to 10x coding utilities and are looking for things to do. They will start clawing away at Google products.
- Just the other day, someone cloned Google Gsuite and it looked awesome
- Drive and Search will also be fungible products
- I'm itching at the chance to build my own phone operating system, and there must be thousands of others who want to do the same.
- Chrome can probably be replaced (Firefox gained a whole percentage point last month)
I don't think Google is safe anymore.
Two caveats that I'll give them:
- YouTube still has network effects and probably can't be dislodged
- Google cloud isn't going anywhere
watwut 34 seconds ago [-]
> Hoards of unemployed engineers now have access to 10x coding utilities and are looking for things to do. They will start clawing away at Google products.
No way this is threat to google. For the same reason why the same hordes of engineers did not managed to compete with large companies up to now. And for the same reason they were not producing all that many novel small apps last 10 years.
This is winner takes all economy. Tokens or no tokes, this is not the econony of small competing companies. This is the world of big ones.
BeetleB 20 minutes ago [-]
> Google search is on the way out. I don't know any of my peers who use it anymore.
What do they use?
Of all my tech friends, colleagues, I'm the only one who uses Kagi. Another person uses searx. Everyone else uses Google.
Of my non-tech friends and colleagues, everyone uses Google.
aqfamnzc 16 minutes ago [-]
Let me tell you about this new little-known technology that's been gaining traction in the last few years...
janalsncm 6 minutes ago [-]
Sure, go ahead and ask the LLM who won the 2026 World Cup. Or nearby BBQ places open now.
Even assuming no hallucinations, an LLM can replace some use cases for search but not all.
ffsm8 2 minutes ago [-]
Fwiw, I've done those kinds of requests before and it did so successfully.
It did use Google to provide me with the answers though, sooo...
BeetleB 7 minutes ago [-]
Really bad idea for a lot of search use cases.
worik 17 minutes ago [-]
> Of my non-tech friends and colleagues, everyone uses Google.
Me, almost, too.
I have some friends using duckduckgo - not many and only until Google is the default again...
bstsb 13 minutes ago [-]
> Google search is on the way out. I don't know any of my peers who use it anymore.
bear in mind we're on Hacker News. Google's market share is still above 90% - in almost any other market this would be a ridiculous monopoly.
hommelix 16 minutes ago [-]
> - I'm itching at the chance to build my own phone operating system, and there must be thousands of others who want to do the same.
Maybe look into contributing to existing alternatives like PostmarketOS.
Please don't send vibecoders to established open source projects . Your literally sabotaging them if you succeed.
layer8 5 minutes ago [-]
Google’s moat is that websites aren’t blocking their crawler.
rebasedoctopus 15 minutes ago [-]
are your peers me, myself, and I? that is a wild claim. I'll start asking around but I don't think I could find one person that says they don't use google search anymore
paul7986 43 minutes ago [-]
What about them taking content for their AI summaries? Have they created a system that gets content owners and creators paid in this regard yet?
guardiangod 2 hours ago [-]
“You are trying to kidnap what I have rightfully stolen, and I think it quite ungentlemanly."
throwaway87543 53 minutes ago [-]
Google crawling respects robots.txt and doesn't break capcha. It is easy to tell Google to piss off. SerpAPI fully relies on end-user proxies distributed like malware (in LG tv apps for instance), it has no other way it could function because it exclusively ingests data from sources that tell it to stop. If you wanted to scrape a bot friendly site, you wouldn't need SerpApi
horsawlarway 13 minutes ago [-]
I'm vaguely sympathetic to this argument.
But only vaguely. Google uses its monopoly position in advertising to basically ensure that you allow them to scrape your site (or if not you personally, the majority of revenue driving sites). They have the benefit of being allowed by default.
They also then scrape again at the user level for users operating chrome.
They also conveniently ignore global blocks for their adsbots (you have to specifically name them to block them).
If you're not Google, you likely don't have this luxury.
My preference would be that governments force search indexes to be public. The exact mechanisms for this can be debated.
Varelion 1 hours ago [-]
This sums up every single bit of AI "progress" since 2022.
ChrisArchitect 1 hours ago [-]
Source:
Google vs. SerpApi: The Court Granted Our Motion to Dismiss
Google does supply search grounding with Gemini API calls, and that is handy, but not general enough.
Basically, search engines are publicly scrapable, though I do wonder as from a law point of view, that it must be within the murky waters as to what a search engine means in terms of seperating its search engine code/its recomendation engine and the public data much of which are intertwined with each other.
I believe that the argument that could be made is that the recommendation engine is the way it is because of all the data and its unseperable to really copyright the whole mechanism in all its glory.
Speaking of which, it seems that AI models feel really similar. Does this judge lawsuit show that AI model weights aren't copyrightable as well? If a search engine is built on public indexes then so are the AI models. I was just writing similar comment on another thread but it seems to be the case, definitely worth a blog article or thinking more about perhaps this judgement by this judge itself in general as well, I just have a vibe that this judgement has pretty far reaching consequences in its impact.
- Google search is on the way out. I don't know any of my peers who use it anymore.
- Coding models make doing extreme depth of work possible.
- Hoards of unemployed engineers now have access to 10x coding utilities and are looking for things to do. They will start clawing away at Google products.
- Just the other day, someone cloned Google Gsuite and it looked awesome
- Drive and Search will also be fungible products
- I'm itching at the chance to build my own phone operating system, and there must be thousands of others who want to do the same.
- Chrome can probably be replaced (Firefox gained a whole percentage point last month)
I don't think Google is safe anymore.
Two caveats that I'll give them:
- YouTube still has network effects and probably can't be dislodged
- Google cloud isn't going anywhere
No way this is threat to google. For the same reason why the same hordes of engineers did not managed to compete with large companies up to now. And for the same reason they were not producing all that many novel small apps last 10 years.
This is winner takes all economy. Tokens or no tokes, this is not the econony of small competing companies. This is the world of big ones.
What do they use?
Of all my tech friends, colleagues, I'm the only one who uses Kagi. Another person uses searx. Everyone else uses Google.
Of my non-tech friends and colleagues, everyone uses Google.
Even assuming no hallucinations, an LLM can replace some use cases for search but not all.
It did use Google to provide me with the answers though, sooo...
Me, almost, too.
I have some friends using duckduckgo - not many and only until Google is the default again...
bear in mind we're on Hacker News. Google's market share is still above 90% - in almost any other market this would be a ridiculous monopoly.
Maybe look into contributing to existing alternatives like PostmarketOS.
https://postmarketos.org/
But only vaguely. Google uses its monopoly position in advertising to basically ensure that you allow them to scrape your site (or if not you personally, the majority of revenue driving sites). They have the benefit of being allowed by default.
They also then scrape again at the user level for users operating chrome.
They also conveniently ignore global blocks for their adsbots (you have to specifically name them to block them).
If you're not Google, you likely don't have this luxury.
My preference would be that governments force search indexes to be public. The exact mechanisms for this can be debated.
Google vs. SerpApi: The Court Granted Our Motion to Dismiss
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48995411