Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
The ruling in hiQ v. LinkedIn does not exempt civil liability for violating platform terms of service, nor does it address independent compliance obligations under the GDPR data minimization principle.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
9/12/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedThe hiQ v. LinkedIn ruling only applies within the U.S. Ninth Circuit and is still subject to the threat of civil litigation under platform terms of service.74% similarUnverifiedThe 2022 U.S. case hiQ Labs v. LinkedIn affirmed the legality of scraping publicly available data, while the EU's GDPR imposes strict restrictions on the scraping of personal data.72% similarUnverifiedGDPR第7条第4款规定，当数据处理的同意与合同履行相捆绑，且该数据处理对合同履行并非必要时，此类同意不得被视为自由给出65% similarUnverifiedThe limitation of the hiQ ruling is that it only constrains the U.S. Ninth Circuit jurisdiction; if a platform requires login, CFAA risks re-emerge, and platforms can still assert rights under copyright law or contract law.64% similarUnverifiedRegulators have determined that formal human intervention steps that lack substantive review capability are insufficient to circumvent the applicability of Article 22 of the GDPR.63% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/913567API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/913567MCP
get_claim(id=913567)