The Moscow State Commercial Court has issued a ruling recognizing the right to web scraping (i.e., the automated extraction of machine-readable data from a website using a specialized algorithm) as part of the right to information. Previously, Russian court practice generally treated web scraping solely as a violation of a database owner’s exclusive rights.
Case Background
The plaintiff was developing a database of medical organizations by scraping information from the official websites of clinics. The collected data consisted of information that clinics are legally required to disclose, including, in particular, waiting times for services, risks to patients, potential consequences of medical intervention, and related disclosures. While attempting to scrape the defendant’s website, the plaintiff discovered that this data was not publicly available.
The plaintiff filed a claim seeking to compel the defendant to refrain from obstructing the creation of an IP object by the plaintiff and the exercise of the right to information through web scraping, specifically by requiring the defendant to publish the information subject to mandatory disclosure on its website (Paragraph 7, Article 12 of the Russian Civil Code).
The Court’s Position
The Court ordered the defendant to publish the missing information and stated the following:
Information that must be published pursuant to statute is publicly available by law and therefore cannot be concealed and its use does not infringe exclusive rights or violate copyright or personal data protection requirements.
The absence of such information violates the plaintiff’s right of access to information (Article 8 of the Federal Law “On Information, Information Technologies, and Protection of Information”).
Restricting access to information renders the technological process of web scraping impossible.
The position adopted by the Moscow State Commercial Court may represent the first step toward a new judicial approach to evaluating web scraping in the context of protecting the right of access to information.
In similar disputes, courts frequently dismiss claims on the following grounds:
No legal relationship exists between the parties obligating the website owner to publish the information.
Access to a website equals the opportunity to collect information. Impediments to automated collection are irrelevant if the information can be obtained by other means.
The plaintiff is not protecting a personal right to information but rather asserting public interests.
We will continue to monitor developments in court practice on this issue!