“Google and Reddit do not own the Internet," web scraper says after court win

2026-07-27 · Source: AI - Ars Technica · Field: Legal & Regulatory — Intellectual Property & Patents, Compliance & Risk Management, Legal Technology (LegalTech) · Depth: Intermediate, medium

Summary

Google and Reddit initiated separate lawsuits against web scraper SerpApi, alleging DMCA violations for circumventing anti-scraping technologies and selling scraped content. Google specifically accused SerpApi of creating an unauthorized "Google Search API" and disrupting relationships with rights holders by scraping content, including from "knowledge panels," making it impossible to offset costs from "billions" of bot searches. However, a court recently granted SerpApi's motion to dismiss Google's case, ruling Google lacked DMCA standing because it did not own the copyrighted content in search results and failed to demonstrate it was acting for rights holders. This decision casts doubt on Reddit's similar ongoing lawsuit. Google intends to amend its complaint within 21 days, focusing on licensed content within knowledge panels, though this strategy carries risks of admitting broader unlicensed content reproduction. SerpApi, serving clients like Nvidia, Uber, and Adobe, maintains its operations are lawful and defends the open internet against what it calls "misguided" attacks.

Key takeaway

For legal professionals advising on data acquisition or content protection, this ruling underscores that DMCA claims against web scrapers for public search results are unlikely to succeed without direct copyright ownership or explicit licensing. You should re-evaluate strategies for protecting content, recognizing that attempts to "re-enclose" the open web via broad DMCA interpretations face significant judicial skepticism. This impacts AI training data sourcing and broader public access to information.

Key insights

Google and Reddit's DMCA claims against web scrapers are failing due to lack of copyright ownership over public search results.

Principles

• DMCA standing requires copyright ownership or exclusive license.
• Web scraping of public search results is generally lawful.
• Aggressive DMCA claims risk unintended legal consequences.

In practice

• Scrutinize copyright ownership before filing DMCA lawsuits.
• Evaluate legal exposure when aggregating third-party content.
• Advocate for open web access for research and journalism.

Topics

• DMCA Litigation
• Web Scraping
• Copyright Law
• AI Data Acquisition
• Google Lawsuit
• SerpApi

Best for: CTO, VP of Engineering/Data, Executive, Legal Professional, Policy Maker, Director of AI/ML

Related on AIssential

• Google’s anti-search-scraping lawsuit dismissed — Scraping public search results for AI training may not inherently violate copyright or DMCA.
• Authors' lucky break in court may help class action over Meta torrenting — The *Cox v. Sony* Supreme Court ruling on ISP liability for piracy is now central to Meta's AI training data copyright defense.
• News Corp accuses search engine Brave of AI copyright infringement — The legal battle between News Corp and Brave AI highlights the contentious intersection of AI content summarization, web scraping, and copyright law.
• Microsoft trained its MAI models on unlicensed web data despite promising "enterprise grade, clean and commercially licensed data" — Microsoft's MAI models used unlicensed web data, challenging its "clean data" claims amidst ongoing fair use legal disputes.
• Publishers accuse Google of stealing copyrighted content in new lawsuit — Publishers accuse Google of copyright infringement for using books to train AI that competes with original works.
• Judge Rules Blacked.com Can Sue Meta for Scraping Its Porn — Copyright infringement occurs upon unauthorized downloading and distribution, regardless of AI training intent.

See Counsel's argued verdicts on the open AI decisions leaders are weighing →

Open in AIssential →

Editorial summary, takeaway, and curation by AIssential. Original article published by AI - Ars Technica.