Expired50% confidenceOpinionExact time
The article argues that this removal of the controversial passage may well be a product of preventive legal review rather than a substantive change in scraping behavior.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Short-term (~14 days)
Relevance
10/17/2026
First Seen
This claim has expired. It is kept for the record and no longer describes the current state.
Valid until: 10/31/2026(expired)
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedCritics argue that a seemingly neutral technical flight regulation whose primary effect is to prevent public oversight of law enforcement may constitute an indirect restriction on freedom of expression.66% similarUnverifiedIn practice, this policy is more of a legal 'disclaimer' than a hard technical block65% similarUnverifiedIt is recommended not to treat human approval as the core security mechanism, but rather as a supplementary measure, while actively reducing the frequency of manual intervention.64% similarUnverifiedRule 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence stipulates that a court may exclude evidence if its risk of unfair prejudice substantially outweighs its probative value.64% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1056805API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1056805MCP
get_claim(id=1056805)