(mostly, less)

It looks like you have mostly invalidated the second sentence of your first paragraph, and rightly so.

For your second paragraph, following the link gets text that includes:

Google must be given attribution using the appropriate text or brand elements when Google results are shown.

So your second link is clearly meant for a usage other than the original use case (since the original use has Google showing the results itself).

So I'm not convinced that you have yet demonstrated that google has any policy against the practice orignally described.

If not illegal

At least you didn't say that it might be "stealing" or "a crime". But this smacks of the escalation of language that has been pushed by the I.P. industry (such as the RIAA). There are no laws that specify whether you can create a form that submits a google search. So using "illegal" ("contrary to or forbidden by law, especially criminal law", emphasis preserved not added) is a sloppy escalation that I find is often done as a ploy of rhetoric. I'm not saying that you consciously used that ploy, I'm encouraging people to consciously avoid emulating that ploy which has become so common that having or even observing an intelligent conversation about "intellectual property" has become quite rare.

Just say that you think something might be against Google's policy (or "terms of service" etc.).

As for the specific practice, I don't have any evidence at hand to show that Google has explicitly granted it. But I have made such forms and will do so again (I believe more than one such form can be found on this very site). If the target were not google, then I would have more reluctance to do such. And if google objects to such, then they can very easily prevent it. But I am confident enough in this specific case that I don't even find it warranted to invest effort to look for a statement from Google regarding the practice.

If you come up with a Google document that actually addresses the described practice (not just some other practice that might have some similarities), then that would be appreciated information. And your broader point that websites are within their rights to set limitations on how others use their site and that failing to heed those limitations / policies can have consequences is very valid.

(Updated as marked. My apologies as without that addition that point was not close to as I intended.)

- tye        

In reply to Re^2: using google serach ("illegal") by tye
in thread using google serach by vit

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.