You're definitely right that it's sleazy. (And scraping profiles is particularly so.)
Personally, I'm not entirely sure where the copyright violations or other legality would come down on this: RSS feeds are public and meant to be shared (that's part of the protocol for them, after all.)
However, I think there's a point in the thread here on Elf's journal that while the RSS content isn't actionable, user icons and other unique material (bio, she makes a point about specifically chosen/worded interests) likely is. But I also don't know of a precedent setting case that comes anywhere near it.
On the other hand, one of the things LJ Abuse work taught me is exactly how inventive people can be using technology in a way you didn't expect. Also how *little* awareness of history people have, in terms of technology getting used a particular way, even people working in highly similar sphere. (I see this a lot with Facebook: some new issue gets brought up, and it's something LJ was dealing with in 2003, 2004, 2005, and should not be news for people working in the same general industry.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-08-16 12:29 pm (UTC)Personally, I'm not entirely sure where the copyright violations or other legality would come down on this: RSS feeds are public and meant to be shared (that's part of the protocol for them, after all.)
However, I think there's a point in the thread here on Elf's journal that while the RSS content isn't actionable, user icons and other unique material (bio, she makes a point about specifically chosen/worded interests) likely is. But I also don't know of a precedent setting case that comes anywhere near it.
On the other hand, one of the things LJ Abuse work taught me is exactly how inventive people can be using technology in a way you didn't expect. Also how *little* awareness of history people have, in terms of technology getting used a particular way, even people working in highly similar sphere. (I see this a lot with Facebook: some new issue gets brought up, and it's something LJ was dealing with in 2003, 2004, 2005, and should not be news for people working in the same general industry.)