id
stringlengths 24
24
| title
stringclasses 442
values | context
stringlengths 151
3.71k
| question
stringlengths 12
270
| answers
dict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
5a6b0974a9e0c9001a4e9e8a
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2009, the Internet Archive migrated its customized storage architecture to Sun Open Storage, and hosts a new data center in a Sun Modular Datacenter on Sun Microsystems' California campus.
|
Where does Internet archive run a sun storage center?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0974a9e0c9001a4e9e8b
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2009, the Internet Archive migrated its customized storage architecture to Sun Open Storage, and hosts a new data center in a Sun Modular Datacenter on Sun Microsystems' California campus.
|
When did the Internet Archive leave California?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0974a9e0c9001a4e9e8c
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2009, the Internet Archive migrated its customized storage architecture to Sun Open Storage, and hosts a new data center in a Sun Modular Datacenter on Sun Microsystems' California campus.
|
What state is home to the first data center?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddc21866d3e219004dacd9
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2011 a new, improved version of the Wayback Machine, with an updated interface and fresher index of archived content, was made available for public testing.
|
When was an upgrade of the Wayback Machine released for testing?
|
{
"answer_start": [
3
],
"text": [
"2011"
]
}
|
5a6b0a37a9e0c9001a4e9e92
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2011 a new, improved version of the Wayback Machine, with an updated interface and fresher index of archived content, was made available for public testing.
|
When was an upgrade of the game released for testing?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0a37a9e0c9001a4e9e93
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2011 a new, improved version of the Wayback Machine, with an updated interface and fresher index of archived content, was made available for public testing.
|
What did the Wayback Machine keep the same?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0a37a9e0c9001a4e9e94
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2011 a new, improved version of the Wayback Machine, with an updated interface and fresher index of archived content, was made available for public testing.
|
What was closed for testing?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0a37a9e0c9001a4e9e95
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2011 a new, improved version of the Wayback Machine, with an updated interface and fresher index of archived content, was made available for public testing.
|
What used the same index of archived content?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0a37a9e0c9001a4e9e96
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2011 a new, improved version of the Wayback Machine, with an updated interface and fresher index of archived content, was made available for public testing.
|
When was the Wayback Machine retired?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddc47666d3e219004dacdd
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In March 2011, it was said on the Wayback Machine forum that "The Beta of the new Wayback Machine has a more complete and up-to-date index of all crawled materials into 2010, and will continue to be updated regularly. The index driving the classic Wayback Machine only has a little bit of material past 2008, and no further index updates are planned, as it will be phased out this year".
|
When were details of the test version of the updated Wayback Machine released?
|
{
"answer_start": [
3
],
"text": [
"March 2011"
]
}
|
56ddc47666d3e219004dacde
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In March 2011, it was said on the Wayback Machine forum that "The Beta of the new Wayback Machine has a more complete and up-to-date index of all crawled materials into 2010, and will continue to be updated regularly. The index driving the classic Wayback Machine only has a little bit of material past 2008, and no further index updates are planned, as it will be phased out this year".
|
The older version of Wayback Machine did not have much new data past what year?
|
{
"answer_start": [
303
],
"text": [
"2008"
]
}
|
56ddc47666d3e219004dacdf
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In March 2011, it was said on the Wayback Machine forum that "The Beta of the new Wayback Machine has a more complete and up-to-date index of all crawled materials into 2010, and will continue to be updated regularly. The index driving the classic Wayback Machine only has a little bit of material past 2008, and no further index updates are planned, as it will be phased out this year".
|
The newer version of the Wayback Machine included date up to and including what year?
|
{
"answer_start": [
169
],
"text": [
"2010"
]
}
|
5a6b0e56a9e0c9001a4e9e9c
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In March 2011, it was said on the Wayback Machine forum that "The Beta of the new Wayback Machine has a more complete and up-to-date index of all crawled materials into 2010, and will continue to be updated regularly. The index driving the classic Wayback Machine only has a little bit of material past 2008, and no further index updates are planned, as it will be phased out this year".
|
When were details of the final version of the released?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0e56a9e0c9001a4e9e9d
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In March 2011, it was said on the Wayback Machine forum that "The Beta of the new Wayback Machine has a more complete and up-to-date index of all crawled materials into 2010, and will continue to be updated regularly. The index driving the classic Wayback Machine only has a little bit of material past 2008, and no further index updates are planned, as it will be phased out this year".
|
Past what year did the older version of Wayback Machine had much new data?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0e56a9e0c9001a4e9e9e
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In March 2011, it was said on the Wayback Machine forum that "The Beta of the new Wayback Machine has a more complete and up-to-date index of all crawled materials into 2010, and will continue to be updated regularly. The index driving the classic Wayback Machine only has a little bit of material past 2008, and no further index updates are planned, as it will be phased out this year".
|
In what year was the oldest version of the Wayback Machine?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0e56a9e0c9001a4e9e9f
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In March 2011, it was said on the Wayback Machine forum that "The Beta of the new Wayback Machine has a more complete and up-to-date index of all crawled materials into 2010, and will continue to be updated regularly. The index driving the classic Wayback Machine only has a little bit of material past 2008, and no further index updates are planned, as it will be phased out this year".
|
When did the Wayback Forum talk about the predecessor to the Wayback Machine?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0e56a9e0c9001a4e9ea0
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In March 2011, it was said on the Wayback Machine forum that "The Beta of the new Wayback Machine has a more complete and up-to-date index of all crawled materials into 2010, and will continue to be updated regularly. The index driving the classic Wayback Machine only has a little bit of material past 2008, and no further index updates are planned, as it will be phased out this year".
|
What only has a little bit of material past 2007?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddc4d99a695914005b95bc
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In October 2013, the company announced the "Save a Page" feature which allows any Internet user to archive the contents of a URL. This became a threat of abuse by the service for hosting malicious binaries.
|
What was the functionality called that gave users the ability to save a snapshot of a site?
|
{
"answer_start": [
44
],
"text": [
"Save a Page"
]
}
|
56ddc4d99a695914005b95bd
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In October 2013, the company announced the "Save a Page" feature which allows any Internet user to archive the contents of a URL. This became a threat of abuse by the service for hosting malicious binaries.
|
When was Save a Page made available?
|
{
"answer_start": [
3
],
"text": [
"October 2013"
]
}
|
5a6b0f05a9e0c9001a4e9ea6
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In October 2013, the company announced the "Save a Page" feature which allows any Internet user to archive the contents of a URL. This became a threat of abuse by the service for hosting malicious binaries.
|
What was the functionality called that gave users the ability to save a URL of a site?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0f05a9e0c9001a4e9ea7
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In October 2013, the company announced the "Save a Page" feature which allows any Internet user to archive the contents of a URL. This became a threat of abuse by the service for hosting malicious binaries.
|
When was a URL available?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0f05a9e0c9001a4e9ea8
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In October 2013, the company announced the "Save a Page" feature which allows any Internet user to archive the contents of a URL. This became a threat of abuse by the service for hosting malicious binaries.
|
What became a threat of theft?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0f05a9e0c9001a4e9ea9
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In October 2013, the company announced the "Save a Page" feature which allows any Internet user to archive the contents of a URL. This became a threat of abuse by the service for hosting malicious binaries.
|
When did the company announce "Save a Binary"?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b0f05a9e0c9001a4e9eaa
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In October 2013, the company announced the "Save a Page" feature which allows any Internet user to archive the contents of a URL. This became a threat of abuse by the service for hosting malicious binaries.
|
What did "Save a Company" host?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddc5e59a695914005b95c0
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In a 2009 case, Netbula, LLC v. Chordiant Software Inc., defendant Chordiant filed a motion to compel Netbula to disable the robots.txt file on its web site that was causing the Wayback Machine to retroactively remove access to previous versions of pages it had archived from Nebula's site, pages that Chordiant believed would support its case.
|
What 2009 court battle involved the Wayback Machine?
|
{
"answer_start": [
16
],
"text": [
"Netbula, LLC v. Chordiant Software Inc."
]
}
|
56ddc5e59a695914005b95c1
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In a 2009 case, Netbula, LLC v. Chordiant Software Inc., defendant Chordiant filed a motion to compel Netbula to disable the robots.txt file on its web site that was causing the Wayback Machine to retroactively remove access to previous versions of pages it had archived from Nebula's site, pages that Chordiant believed would support its case.
|
Which company thought that Wayback Machine data was important for its argument?
|
{
"answer_start": [
32
],
"text": [
"Chordiant"
]
}
|
56ddc5e59a695914005b95c2
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In a 2009 case, Netbula, LLC v. Chordiant Software Inc., defendant Chordiant filed a motion to compel Netbula to disable the robots.txt file on its web site that was causing the Wayback Machine to retroactively remove access to previous versions of pages it had archived from Nebula's site, pages that Chordiant believed would support its case.
|
What did Chordiant request that the court deactivate on Netbula's website?
|
{
"answer_start": [
121
],
"text": [
"the robots.txt file"
]
}
|
5a6b1064a9e0c9001a4e9eb0
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In a 2009 case, Netbula, LLC v. Chordiant Software Inc., defendant Chordiant filed a motion to compel Netbula to disable the robots.txt file on its web site that was causing the Wayback Machine to retroactively remove access to previous versions of pages it had archived from Nebula's site, pages that Chordiant believed would support its case.
|
What 2009 court battle involved Netbula's robots?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1064a9e0c9001a4e9eb1
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In a 2009 case, Netbula, LLC v. Chordiant Software Inc., defendant Chordiant filed a motion to compel Netbula to disable the robots.txt file on its web site that was causing the Wayback Machine to retroactively remove access to previous versions of pages it had archived from Nebula's site, pages that Chordiant believed would support its case.
|
Which company thought that Wayback Machine data was important for robots?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1064a9e0c9001a4e9eb2
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In a 2009 case, Netbula, LLC v. Chordiant Software Inc., defendant Chordiant filed a motion to compel Netbula to disable the robots.txt file on its web site that was causing the Wayback Machine to retroactively remove access to previous versions of pages it had archived from Nebula's site, pages that Chordiant believed would support its case.
|
What did the Wayback Machine request that the court deactivate on Netbulas website?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1064a9e0c9001a4e9eb3
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In a 2009 case, Netbula, LLC v. Chordiant Software Inc., defendant Chordiant filed a motion to compel Netbula to disable the robots.txt file on its web site that was causing the Wayback Machine to retroactively remove access to previous versions of pages it had archived from Nebula's site, pages that Chordiant believed would support its case.
|
What did the Wayback Machine believe would support its case?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1064a9e0c9001a4e9eb4
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In a 2009 case, Netbula, LLC v. Chordiant Software Inc., defendant Chordiant filed a motion to compel Netbula to disable the robots.txt file on its web site that was causing the Wayback Machine to retroactively remove access to previous versions of pages it had archived from Nebula's site, pages that Chordiant believed would support its case.
|
Who filed a motion to compel the Wayback Machine to disable the robots.txt file?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddc68966d3e219004dace5
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Netbula objected to the motion on the ground that defendants were asking to alter Netbula's web site and that they should have subpoenaed Internet Archive for the pages directly. An employee of Internet Archive filed a sworn statement supporting Chordiant's motion, however, stating that it could not produce the web pages by any other means "without considerable burden, expense and disruption to its operations."
|
Who did Netbula believe was the entity that should be responsible for the availability of its snapshots?
|
{
"answer_start": [
138
],
"text": [
"Internet Archive"
]
}
|
56ddc68966d3e219004dace6
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Netbula objected to the motion on the ground that defendants were asking to alter Netbula's web site and that they should have subpoenaed Internet Archive for the pages directly. An employee of Internet Archive filed a sworn statement supporting Chordiant's motion, however, stating that it could not produce the web pages by any other means "without considerable burden, expense and disruption to its operations."
|
Which party did Internet Archive side with?
|
{
"answer_start": [
246
],
"text": [
"Chordiant"
]
}
|
5a6b12d5a9e0c9001a4e9eba
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Netbula objected to the motion on the ground that defendants were asking to alter Netbula's web site and that they should have subpoenaed Internet Archive for the pages directly. An employee of Internet Archive filed a sworn statement supporting Chordiant's motion, however, stating that it could not produce the web pages by any other means "without considerable burden, expense and disruption to its operations."
|
Who did Netbula believe was the entity that should be responsible for the availability of its expenses?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b12d5a9e0c9001a4e9ebb
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Netbula objected to the motion on the ground that defendants were asking to alter Netbula's web site and that they should have subpoenaed Internet Archive for the pages directly. An employee of Internet Archive filed a sworn statement supporting Chordiant's motion, however, stating that it could not produce the web pages by any other means "without considerable burden, expense and disruption to its operations."
|
Which party did Netbula side with?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b12d5a9e0c9001a4e9ebc
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Netbula objected to the motion on the ground that defendants were asking to alter Netbula's web site and that they should have subpoenaed Internet Archive for the pages directly. An employee of Internet Archive filed a sworn statement supporting Chordiant's motion, however, stating that it could not produce the web pages by any other means "without considerable burden, expense and disruption to its operations."
|
Who objected to the motion on the ground that defendants were asking to alter Chordiant's web site?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b12d5a9e0c9001a4e9ebd
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Netbula objected to the motion on the ground that defendants were asking to alter Netbula's web site and that they should have subpoenaed Internet Archive for the pages directly. An employee of Internet Archive filed a sworn statement supporting Chordiant's motion, however, stating that it could not produce the web pages by any other means "without considerable burden, expense and disruption to its operations."
|
What would producing web pages have caused Netbula?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b12d5a9e0c9001a4e9ebe
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Netbula objected to the motion on the ground that defendants were asking to alter Netbula's web site and that they should have subpoenaed Internet Archive for the pages directly. An employee of Internet Archive filed a sworn statement supporting Chordiant's motion, however, stating that it could not produce the web pages by any other means "without considerable burden, expense and disruption to its operations."
|
Who filed a sworn statement supporting Netubla's motion?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddc6e266d3e219004daceb
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, rejected Netbula's arguments and ordered them to disable the robots.txt blockage temporarily in order to allow Chordiant to retrieve the archived pages that they sought.
|
Which judge presided over the Netbula v. Chordiant case?
|
{
"answer_start": [
0
],
"text": [
"Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd"
]
}
|
56ddc6e266d3e219004dacec
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, rejected Netbula's arguments and ordered them to disable the robots.txt blockage temporarily in order to allow Chordiant to retrieve the archived pages that they sought.
|
In what jurisdiction was the Netbula v. Chordiant case tried?
|
{
"answer_start": [
37
],
"text": [
"Northern District of California, San Jose Division"
]
}
|
56ddc6e266d3e219004daced
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, rejected Netbula's arguments and ordered them to disable the robots.txt blockage temporarily in order to allow Chordiant to retrieve the archived pages that they sought.
|
Which party won its argument regarding Netbula's robots.txt file?
|
{
"answer_start": [
200
],
"text": [
"Chordiant"
]
}
|
5a6b1401a9e0c9001a4e9ec4
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, rejected Netbula's arguments and ordered them to disable the robots.txt blockage temporarily in order to allow Chordiant to retrieve the archived pages that they sought.
|
Which judge presided over the California v. Chordiant case?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1401a9e0c9001a4e9ec5
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, rejected Netbula's arguments and ordered them to disable the robots.txt blockage temporarily in order to allow Chordiant to retrieve the archived pages that they sought.
|
In what jurisdiction was the California v. Chordiant case tried?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1401a9e0c9001a4e9ec6
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, rejected Netbula's arguments and ordered them to disable the robots.txt blockage temporarily in order to allow Chordiant to retrieve the archived pages that they sought.
|
Which party won its argument regarding California's robots.txt file?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1401a9e0c9001a4e9ec7
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, rejected Netbula's arguments and ordered them to disable the robots.txt blockage temporarily in order to allow Chordiant to retrieve the archived pages that they sought.
|
Who rejected California's arguments?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1401a9e0c9001a4e9ec8
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, rejected Netbula's arguments and ordered them to disable the robots.txt blockage temporarily in order to allow Chordiant to retrieve the archived pages that they sought.
|
Why was California allowed to disable the robots.txt blockage?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddc9d49a695914005b95cd
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In an October 2004 case, Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite, No. 02 C 3293, 65 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 673 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 15, 2004), a litigant attempted to use the Wayback Machine archives as a source of admissible evidence, perhaps for the first time. Telewizja Polska is the provider of TVP Polonia and EchoStar operates the Dish Network. Prior to the trial proceedings, EchoStar indicated that it intended to offer Wayback Machine snapshots as proof of the past content of Telewizja Polska's web site. Telewizja Polska brought a motion in limine to suppress the snapshots on the grounds of hearsay and unauthenticated source, but Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys rejected Telewizja Polska's assertion of hearsay and denied TVP's motion in limine to exclude the evidence at trial. At the trial, however, district Court Judge Ronald Guzman, the trial judge, overruled Magistrate Keys' findings,[citation needed] and held that neither the affidavit of the Internet Archive employee nor the underlying pages (i.e., the Telewizja Polska website) were admissible as evidence. Judge Guzman reasoned that the employee's affidavit contained both hearsay and inconclusive supporting statements, and the purported web page printouts were not self-authenticating.[citation needed]
|
What does Telewizja Polska operate?
|
{
"answer_start": [
301
],
"text": [
"TVP Polonia"
]
}
|
56ddc9d49a695914005b95ce
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In an October 2004 case, Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite, No. 02 C 3293, 65 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 673 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 15, 2004), a litigant attempted to use the Wayback Machine archives as a source of admissible evidence, perhaps for the first time. Telewizja Polska is the provider of TVP Polonia and EchoStar operates the Dish Network. Prior to the trial proceedings, EchoStar indicated that it intended to offer Wayback Machine snapshots as proof of the past content of Telewizja Polska's web site. Telewizja Polska brought a motion in limine to suppress the snapshots on the grounds of hearsay and unauthenticated source, but Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys rejected Telewizja Polska's assertion of hearsay and denied TVP's motion in limine to exclude the evidence at trial. At the trial, however, district Court Judge Ronald Guzman, the trial judge, overruled Magistrate Keys' findings,[citation needed] and held that neither the affidavit of the Internet Archive employee nor the underlying pages (i.e., the Telewizja Polska website) were admissible as evidence. Judge Guzman reasoned that the employee's affidavit contained both hearsay and inconclusive supporting statements, and the purported web page printouts were not self-authenticating.[citation needed]
|
What is EchoStar's platform?
|
{
"answer_start": [
335
],
"text": [
"the Dish Network"
]
}
|
56ddc9d49a695914005b95cf
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In an October 2004 case, Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite, No. 02 C 3293, 65 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 673 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 15, 2004), a litigant attempted to use the Wayback Machine archives as a source of admissible evidence, perhaps for the first time. Telewizja Polska is the provider of TVP Polonia and EchoStar operates the Dish Network. Prior to the trial proceedings, EchoStar indicated that it intended to offer Wayback Machine snapshots as proof of the past content of Telewizja Polska's web site. Telewizja Polska brought a motion in limine to suppress the snapshots on the grounds of hearsay and unauthenticated source, but Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys rejected Telewizja Polska's assertion of hearsay and denied TVP's motion in limine to exclude the evidence at trial. At the trial, however, district Court Judge Ronald Guzman, the trial judge, overruled Magistrate Keys' findings,[citation needed] and held that neither the affidavit of the Internet Archive employee nor the underlying pages (i.e., the Telewizja Polska website) were admissible as evidence. Judge Guzman reasoned that the employee's affidavit contained both hearsay and inconclusive supporting statements, and the purported web page printouts were not self-authenticating.[citation needed]
|
Which judge denied Telewizja Polska's attempt to block the use of Internet Archive contents as evidence?
|
{
"answer_start": [
645
],
"text": [
"Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys"
]
}
|
56ddc9d49a695914005b95d0
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In an October 2004 case, Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite, No. 02 C 3293, 65 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 673 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 15, 2004), a litigant attempted to use the Wayback Machine archives as a source of admissible evidence, perhaps for the first time. Telewizja Polska is the provider of TVP Polonia and EchoStar operates the Dish Network. Prior to the trial proceedings, EchoStar indicated that it intended to offer Wayback Machine snapshots as proof of the past content of Telewizja Polska's web site. Telewizja Polska brought a motion in limine to suppress the snapshots on the grounds of hearsay and unauthenticated source, but Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys rejected Telewizja Polska's assertion of hearsay and denied TVP's motion in limine to exclude the evidence at trial. At the trial, however, district Court Judge Ronald Guzman, the trial judge, overruled Magistrate Keys' findings,[citation needed] and held that neither the affidavit of the Internet Archive employee nor the underlying pages (i.e., the Telewizja Polska website) were admissible as evidence. Judge Guzman reasoned that the employee's affidavit contained both hearsay and inconclusive supporting statements, and the purported web page printouts were not self-authenticating.[citation needed]
|
Which judge overturned Keys' ruling?
|
{
"answer_start": [
816
],
"text": [
"district Court Judge Ronald Guzman"
]
}
|
5a6b165fa9e0c9001a4e9ece
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In an October 2004 case, Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite, No. 02 C 3293, 65 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 673 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 15, 2004), a litigant attempted to use the Wayback Machine archives as a source of admissible evidence, perhaps for the first time. Telewizja Polska is the provider of TVP Polonia and EchoStar operates the Dish Network. Prior to the trial proceedings, EchoStar indicated that it intended to offer Wayback Machine snapshots as proof of the past content of Telewizja Polska's web site. Telewizja Polska brought a motion in limine to suppress the snapshots on the grounds of hearsay and unauthenticated source, but Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys rejected Telewizja Polska's assertion of hearsay and denied TVP's motion in limine to exclude the evidence at trial. At the trial, however, district Court Judge Ronald Guzman, the trial judge, overruled Magistrate Keys' findings,[citation needed] and held that neither the affidavit of the Internet Archive employee nor the underlying pages (i.e., the Telewizja Polska website) were admissible as evidence. Judge Guzman reasoned that the employee's affidavit contained both hearsay and inconclusive supporting statements, and the purported web page printouts were not self-authenticating.[citation needed]
|
What does Telewizja Polska intend to offer?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b165fa9e0c9001a4e9ecf
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In an October 2004 case, Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite, No. 02 C 3293, 65 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 673 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 15, 2004), a litigant attempted to use the Wayback Machine archives as a source of admissible evidence, perhaps for the first time. Telewizja Polska is the provider of TVP Polonia and EchoStar operates the Dish Network. Prior to the trial proceedings, EchoStar indicated that it intended to offer Wayback Machine snapshots as proof of the past content of Telewizja Polska's web site. Telewizja Polska brought a motion in limine to suppress the snapshots on the grounds of hearsay and unauthenticated source, but Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys rejected Telewizja Polska's assertion of hearsay and denied TVP's motion in limine to exclude the evidence at trial. At the trial, however, district Court Judge Ronald Guzman, the trial judge, overruled Magistrate Keys' findings,[citation needed] and held that neither the affidavit of the Internet Archive employee nor the underlying pages (i.e., the Telewizja Polska website) were admissible as evidence. Judge Guzman reasoned that the employee's affidavit contained both hearsay and inconclusive supporting statements, and the purported web page printouts were not self-authenticating.[citation needed]
|
What is Romand Guzmans platform?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b165fa9e0c9001a4e9ed0
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In an October 2004 case, Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite, No. 02 C 3293, 65 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 673 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 15, 2004), a litigant attempted to use the Wayback Machine archives as a source of admissible evidence, perhaps for the first time. Telewizja Polska is the provider of TVP Polonia and EchoStar operates the Dish Network. Prior to the trial proceedings, EchoStar indicated that it intended to offer Wayback Machine snapshots as proof of the past content of Telewizja Polska's web site. Telewizja Polska brought a motion in limine to suppress the snapshots on the grounds of hearsay and unauthenticated source, but Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys rejected Telewizja Polska's assertion of hearsay and denied TVP's motion in limine to exclude the evidence at trial. At the trial, however, district Court Judge Ronald Guzman, the trial judge, overruled Magistrate Keys' findings,[citation needed] and held that neither the affidavit of the Internet Archive employee nor the underlying pages (i.e., the Telewizja Polska website) were admissible as evidence. Judge Guzman reasoned that the employee's affidavit contained both hearsay and inconclusive supporting statements, and the purported web page printouts were not self-authenticating.[citation needed]
|
Which judge denied Echostar's attempt to block the use of Internet Archive contents as evidence?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b165fa9e0c9001a4e9ed1
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In an October 2004 case, Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite, No. 02 C 3293, 65 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 673 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 15, 2004), a litigant attempted to use the Wayback Machine archives as a source of admissible evidence, perhaps for the first time. Telewizja Polska is the provider of TVP Polonia and EchoStar operates the Dish Network. Prior to the trial proceedings, EchoStar indicated that it intended to offer Wayback Machine snapshots as proof of the past content of Telewizja Polska's web site. Telewizja Polska brought a motion in limine to suppress the snapshots on the grounds of hearsay and unauthenticated source, but Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys rejected Telewizja Polska's assertion of hearsay and denied TVP's motion in limine to exclude the evidence at trial. At the trial, however, district Court Judge Ronald Guzman, the trial judge, overruled Magistrate Keys' findings,[citation needed] and held that neither the affidavit of the Internet Archive employee nor the underlying pages (i.e., the Telewizja Polska website) were admissible as evidence. Judge Guzman reasoned that the employee's affidavit contained both hearsay and inconclusive supporting statements, and the purported web page printouts were not self-authenticating.[citation needed]
|
Which judge overturned Polska's ruling?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b165fa9e0c9001a4e9ed2
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In an October 2004 case, Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite, No. 02 C 3293, 65 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 673 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 15, 2004), a litigant attempted to use the Wayback Machine archives as a source of admissible evidence, perhaps for the first time. Telewizja Polska is the provider of TVP Polonia and EchoStar operates the Dish Network. Prior to the trial proceedings, EchoStar indicated that it intended to offer Wayback Machine snapshots as proof of the past content of Telewizja Polska's web site. Telewizja Polska brought a motion in limine to suppress the snapshots on the grounds of hearsay and unauthenticated source, but Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys rejected Telewizja Polska's assertion of hearsay and denied TVP's motion in limine to exclude the evidence at trial. At the trial, however, district Court Judge Ronald Guzman, the trial judge, overruled Magistrate Keys' findings,[citation needed] and held that neither the affidavit of the Internet Archive employee nor the underlying pages (i.e., the Telewizja Polska website) were admissible as evidence. Judge Guzman reasoned that the employee's affidavit contained both hearsay and inconclusive supporting statements, and the purported web page printouts were not self-authenticating.[citation needed]
|
Who rejected Echostar's assertion of hearsay?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddca9d9a695914005b95d7
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Provided some additional requirements are met (e.g. providing an authoritative statement of the archivist), the United States patent office and the European Patent Office will accept date stamps from the Internet Archive as evidence of when a given Web page was accessible to the public. These dates are used to determine if a Web page is available as prior art for instance in examining a patent application.
|
When are Internet Archive timestamps useful for patent offices?
|
{
"answer_start": [
375
],
"text": [
"in examining a patent application"
]
}
|
56ddca9d9a695914005b95d8
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Provided some additional requirements are met (e.g. providing an authoritative statement of the archivist), the United States patent office and the European Patent Office will accept date stamps from the Internet Archive as evidence of when a given Web page was accessible to the public. These dates are used to determine if a Web page is available as prior art for instance in examining a patent application.
|
What is an example of a condition that must be met for the Internet Archive data to be considered acceptable for submission to patent offices in the US and Europe?
|
{
"answer_start": [
65
],
"text": [
"authoritative statement of the archivist"
]
}
|
5a6b1877a9e0c9001a4e9ed8
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Provided some additional requirements are met (e.g. providing an authoritative statement of the archivist), the United States patent office and the European Patent Office will accept date stamps from the Internet Archive as evidence of when a given Web page was accessible to the public. These dates are used to determine if a Web page is available as prior art for instance in examining a patent application.
|
When are Internet Archive timestamps harmful for patent offices?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1877a9e0c9001a4e9ed9
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Provided some additional requirements are met (e.g. providing an authoritative statement of the archivist), the United States patent office and the European Patent Office will accept date stamps from the Internet Archive as evidence of when a given Web page was accessible to the public. These dates are used to determine if a Web page is available as prior art for instance in examining a patent application.
|
What is an example of a condition that must be met for the Internet Archive data to be considered acceptable for submission to patent offices on the Web?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1877a9e0c9001a4e9eda
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Provided some additional requirements are met (e.g. providing an authoritative statement of the archivist), the United States patent office and the European Patent Office will accept date stamps from the Internet Archive as evidence of when a given Web page was accessible to the public. These dates are used to determine if a Web page is available as prior art for instance in examining a patent application.
|
What are used to determine if a patent is available?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1877a9e0c9001a4e9edb
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Provided some additional requirements are met (e.g. providing an authoritative statement of the archivist), the United States patent office and the European Patent Office will accept date stamps from the Internet Archive as evidence of when a given Web page was accessible to the public. These dates are used to determine if a Web page is available as prior art for instance in examining a patent application.
|
What will accept date stamps from the public?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1877a9e0c9001a4e9edc
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Provided some additional requirements are met (e.g. providing an authoritative statement of the archivist), the United States patent office and the European Patent Office will accept date stamps from the Internet Archive as evidence of when a given Web page was accessible to the public. These dates are used to determine if a Web page is available as prior art for instance in examining a patent application.
|
What does the patent offices require before they accept applications for employment?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddcf4166d3e219004dacf7
|
Wayback_Machine
|
There are technical limitations to archiving a web site, and as a consequence, it is possible for opposing parties in litigation to misuse the results provided by web site archives. This problem can be exacerbated by the practice of submitting screen shots of web pages in complaints, answers, or expert witness reports, when the underlying links are not exposed and therefore, can contain errors. For example, archives such as the Wayback Machine do not fill out forms and therefore, do not include the contents of non-RESTful e-commerce databases in their archives.
|
What kind of limitations exist in keeping copies of a website?
|
{
"answer_start": [
10
],
"text": [
"technical"
]
}
|
56ddcf4166d3e219004dacf8
|
Wayback_Machine
|
There are technical limitations to archiving a web site, and as a consequence, it is possible for opposing parties in litigation to misuse the results provided by web site archives. This problem can be exacerbated by the practice of submitting screen shots of web pages in complaints, answers, or expert witness reports, when the underlying links are not exposed and therefore, can contain errors. For example, archives such as the Wayback Machine do not fill out forms and therefore, do not include the contents of non-RESTful e-commerce databases in their archives.
|
The omission of what element in screenshots can make them unreliable as evidence?
|
{
"answer_start": [
330
],
"text": [
"underlying links"
]
}
|
56ddcf4166d3e219004dacf9
|
Wayback_Machine
|
There are technical limitations to archiving a web site, and as a consequence, it is possible for opposing parties in litigation to misuse the results provided by web site archives. This problem can be exacerbated by the practice of submitting screen shots of web pages in complaints, answers, or expert witness reports, when the underlying links are not exposed and therefore, can contain errors. For example, archives such as the Wayback Machine do not fill out forms and therefore, do not include the contents of non-RESTful e-commerce databases in their archives.
|
What elements of webpages are not used by Wayback Machine?
|
{
"answer_start": [
464
],
"text": [
"forms"
]
}
|
56ddcf4166d3e219004dacfa
|
Wayback_Machine
|
There are technical limitations to archiving a web site, and as a consequence, it is possible for opposing parties in litigation to misuse the results provided by web site archives. This problem can be exacerbated by the practice of submitting screen shots of web pages in complaints, answers, or expert witness reports, when the underlying links are not exposed and therefore, can contain errors. For example, archives such as the Wayback Machine do not fill out forms and therefore, do not include the contents of non-RESTful e-commerce databases in their archives.
|
What kind of sites contain information that the Wayback Machine does not record?
|
{
"answer_start": [
528
],
"text": [
"e-commerce"
]
}
|
5a6b1c23a9e0c9001a4e9ee2
|
Wayback_Machine
|
There are technical limitations to archiving a web site, and as a consequence, it is possible for opposing parties in litigation to misuse the results provided by web site archives. This problem can be exacerbated by the practice of submitting screen shots of web pages in complaints, answers, or expert witness reports, when the underlying links are not exposed and therefore, can contain errors. For example, archives such as the Wayback Machine do not fill out forms and therefore, do not include the contents of non-RESTful e-commerce databases in their archives.
|
What kind of limitations exist in keeping copies of the Wayback Machine?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1c23a9e0c9001a4e9ee3
|
Wayback_Machine
|
There are technical limitations to archiving a web site, and as a consequence, it is possible for opposing parties in litigation to misuse the results provided by web site archives. This problem can be exacerbated by the practice of submitting screen shots of web pages in complaints, answers, or expert witness reports, when the underlying links are not exposed and therefore, can contain errors. For example, archives such as the Wayback Machine do not fill out forms and therefore, do not include the contents of non-RESTful e-commerce databases in their archives.
|
The omission of what element in Wayback Machines can make them unreliable as evidence?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1c23a9e0c9001a4e9ee4
|
Wayback_Machine
|
There are technical limitations to archiving a web site, and as a consequence, it is possible for opposing parties in litigation to misuse the results provided by web site archives. This problem can be exacerbated by the practice of submitting screen shots of web pages in complaints, answers, or expert witness reports, when the underlying links are not exposed and therefore, can contain errors. For example, archives such as the Wayback Machine do not fill out forms and therefore, do not include the contents of non-RESTful e-commerce databases in their archives.
|
What elements of webpages are not used by site archives?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1c23a9e0c9001a4e9ee5
|
Wayback_Machine
|
There are technical limitations to archiving a web site, and as a consequence, it is possible for opposing parties in litigation to misuse the results provided by web site archives. This problem can be exacerbated by the practice of submitting screen shots of web pages in complaints, answers, or expert witness reports, when the underlying links are not exposed and therefore, can contain errors. For example, archives such as the Wayback Machine do not fill out forms and therefore, do not include the contents of non-RESTful e-commerce databases in their archives.
|
What kind of sites contain information that the screen shots do not record?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1c23a9e0c9001a4e9ee6
|
Wayback_Machine
|
There are technical limitations to archiving a web site, and as a consequence, it is possible for opposing parties in litigation to misuse the results provided by web site archives. This problem can be exacerbated by the practice of submitting screen shots of web pages in complaints, answers, or expert witness reports, when the underlying links are not exposed and therefore, can contain errors. For example, archives such as the Wayback Machine do not fill out forms and therefore, do not include the contents of non-RESTful e-commerce databases in their archives.
|
When is it possible for opposing parties to misuse e-commerce?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddd0509a695914005b95ec
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In Europe the Wayback Machine could be interpreted as violating copyright laws. Only the content creator can decide where their content is published or duplicated, so the Archive would have to delete pages from its system upon request of the creator. The exclusion policies for the Wayback Machine may be found in the FAQ section of the site. The Wayback Machine also retroactively respects robots.txt files, i.e., pages that currently are blocked to robots on the live web temporarily will be made unavailable from the archives as well.
|
What kinds of laws could the Wayback Machine be viewed as breaking in Europe?
|
{
"answer_start": [
64
],
"text": [
"copyright laws"
]
}
|
56ddd0509a695914005b95ed
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In Europe the Wayback Machine could be interpreted as violating copyright laws. Only the content creator can decide where their content is published or duplicated, so the Archive would have to delete pages from its system upon request of the creator. The exclusion policies for the Wayback Machine may be found in the FAQ section of the site. The Wayback Machine also retroactively respects robots.txt files, i.e., pages that currently are blocked to robots on the live web temporarily will be made unavailable from the archives as well.
|
What would the Internet Archive have to do if requested by someone whose content is available on Wayback Machine?
|
{
"answer_start": [
193
],
"text": [
"delete pages from its system"
]
}
|
56ddd0509a695914005b95ee
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In Europe the Wayback Machine could be interpreted as violating copyright laws. Only the content creator can decide where their content is published or duplicated, so the Archive would have to delete pages from its system upon request of the creator. The exclusion policies for the Wayback Machine may be found in the FAQ section of the site. The Wayback Machine also retroactively respects robots.txt files, i.e., pages that currently are blocked to robots on the live web temporarily will be made unavailable from the archives as well.
|
In what part of the website are Wayback Machine's rules regarding removing content?
|
{
"answer_start": [
318
],
"text": [
"FAQ"
]
}
|
5a6b1e6ba9e0c9001a4e9eec
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In Europe the Wayback Machine could be interpreted as violating copyright laws. Only the content creator can decide where their content is published or duplicated, so the Archive would have to delete pages from its system upon request of the creator. The exclusion policies for the Wayback Machine may be found in the FAQ section of the site. The Wayback Machine also retroactively respects robots.txt files, i.e., pages that currently are blocked to robots on the live web temporarily will be made unavailable from the archives as well.
|
What kinds of laws could the Wayback Machine be viewed as breaking in the FAQ?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1e6ba9e0c9001a4e9eed
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In Europe the Wayback Machine could be interpreted as violating copyright laws. Only the content creator can decide where their content is published or duplicated, so the Archive would have to delete pages from its system upon request of the creator. The exclusion policies for the Wayback Machine may be found in the FAQ section of the site. The Wayback Machine also retroactively respects robots.txt files, i.e., pages that currently are blocked to robots on the live web temporarily will be made unavailable from the archives as well.
|
What would the Internet Archive have to do if requested by someone whose content is available on robots.txt files?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1e6ba9e0c9001a4e9eee
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In Europe the Wayback Machine could be interpreted as violating copyright laws. Only the content creator can decide where their content is published or duplicated, so the Archive would have to delete pages from its system upon request of the creator. The exclusion policies for the Wayback Machine may be found in the FAQ section of the site. The Wayback Machine also retroactively respects robots.txt files, i.e., pages that currently are blocked to robots on the live web temporarily will be made unavailable from the archives as well.
|
In what part of Europe are Wayback Machine's rules regarding removing content?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1e6ba9e0c9001a4e9eef
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In Europe the Wayback Machine could be interpreted as violating copyright laws. Only the content creator can decide where their content is published or duplicated, so the Archive would have to delete pages from its system upon request of the creator. The exclusion policies for the Wayback Machine may be found in the FAQ section of the site. The Wayback Machine also retroactively respects robots.txt files, i.e., pages that currently are blocked to robots on the live web temporarily will be made unavailable from the archives as well.
|
What may be found in the robots.txt files section of the site?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b1e6ba9e0c9001a4e9ef0
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In Europe the Wayback Machine could be interpreted as violating copyright laws. Only the content creator can decide where their content is published or duplicated, so the Archive would have to delete pages from its system upon request of the creator. The exclusion policies for the Wayback Machine may be found in the FAQ section of the site. The Wayback Machine also retroactively respects robots.txt files, i.e., pages that currently are blocked to robots on the live web temporarily will be made unavailable from the archives as well.
|
Who can decide when pages are deleted from Europe?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddd22366d3e219004dacff
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In late 2002, the Internet Archive removed various sites that were critical of Scientology from the Wayback Machine. An error message stated that this was in response to a "request by the site owner." Later, it was clarified that lawyers from the Church of Scientology had demanded the removal and that the site owners did not want their material removed.
|
Web pages that contained content critical of what religous movement were taken off of the Internet Archive in 2002?
|
{
"answer_start": [
79
],
"text": [
"Scientology"
]
}
|
56ddd22366d3e219004dad00
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In late 2002, the Internet Archive removed various sites that were critical of Scientology from the Wayback Machine. An error message stated that this was in response to a "request by the site owner." Later, it was clarified that lawyers from the Church of Scientology had demanded the removal and that the site owners did not want their material removed.
|
Who was mistakenly credited for having the sites with criticism of Scientology removed from the Internet Archive?
|
{
"answer_start": [
184
],
"text": [
"the site owner"
]
}
|
56ddd22366d3e219004dad01
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In late 2002, the Internet Archive removed various sites that were critical of Scientology from the Wayback Machine. An error message stated that this was in response to a "request by the site owner." Later, it was clarified that lawyers from the Church of Scientology had demanded the removal and that the site owners did not want their material removed.
|
Who was the actual party that requested the critical sites be taken down?
|
{
"answer_start": [
247
],
"text": [
"Church of Scientology"
]
}
|
5a6b2219a9e0c9001a4e9ef6
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In late 2002, the Internet Archive removed various sites that were critical of Scientology from the Wayback Machine. An error message stated that this was in response to a "request by the site owner." Later, it was clarified that lawyers from the Church of Scientology had demanded the removal and that the site owners did not want their material removed.
|
Web pages that contained content critical of what religious movement were taken off of the Wayback Machine in 2002?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b2219a9e0c9001a4e9ef7
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In late 2002, the Internet Archive removed various sites that were critical of Scientology from the Wayback Machine. An error message stated that this was in response to a "request by the site owner." Later, it was clarified that lawyers from the Church of Scientology had demanded the removal and that the site owners did not want their material removed.
|
Who was mistakenly credited for having the sites with criticism of Scientology removed from the Wayback Machine?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b2219a9e0c9001a4e9ef8
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In late 2002, the Internet Archive removed various sites that were critical of Scientology from the Wayback Machine. An error message stated that this was in response to a "request by the site owner." Later, it was clarified that lawyers from the Church of Scientology had demanded the removal and that the site owners did not want their material removed.
|
Who was the actual party that requested the Wayback Machine to be taken down?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b2219a9e0c9001a4e9ef9
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In late 2002, the Internet Archive removed various sites that were critical of Scientology from the Wayback Machine. An error message stated that this was in response to a "request by the site owner." Later, it was clarified that lawyers from the Church of Scientology had demanded the removal and that the site owners did not want their material removed.
|
When did the Church of Scientology remove files?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b2219a9e0c9001a4e9efa
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In late 2002, the Internet Archive removed various sites that were critical of Scientology from the Wayback Machine. An error message stated that this was in response to a "request by the site owner." Later, it was clarified that lawyers from the Church of Scientology had demanded the removal and that the site owners did not want their material removed.
|
Who did not want the Wayback Machine removed?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddd58e66d3e219004dad0d
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2003, Harding Earley Follmer & Frailey defended a client from a trademark dispute using the Archive's Wayback Machine. The attorneys were able to demonstrate that the claims made by the plaintiff were invalid, based on the content of their web site from several years prior. The plaintiff, Healthcare Advocates, then amended their complaint to include the Internet Archive, accusing the organization of copyright infringement as well as violations of the DMCA and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Healthcare Advocates claimed that, since they had installed a robots.txt file on their web site, even if after the initial lawsuit was filed, the Archive should have removed all previous copies of the plaintiff web site from the Wayback Machine. The lawsuit was settled out of court.
|
Which law firm leveraged Wayback Machine to protect their client in 2003?
|
{
"answer_start": [
9
],
"text": [
"Harding Earley Follmer & Frailey"
]
}
|
56ddd58e66d3e219004dad0e
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2003, Harding Earley Follmer & Frailey defended a client from a trademark dispute using the Archive's Wayback Machine. The attorneys were able to demonstrate that the claims made by the plaintiff were invalid, based on the content of their web site from several years prior. The plaintiff, Healthcare Advocates, then amended their complaint to include the Internet Archive, accusing the organization of copyright infringement as well as violations of the DMCA and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Healthcare Advocates claimed that, since they had installed a robots.txt file on their web site, even if after the initial lawsuit was filed, the Archive should have removed all previous copies of the plaintiff web site from the Wayback Machine. The lawsuit was settled out of court.
|
Which company filed suit against Harding, Earley, Follmer & Frailey's client?
|
{
"answer_start": [
293
],
"text": [
"Healthcare Advocates"
]
}
|
56ddd58e66d3e219004dad0f
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2003, Harding Earley Follmer & Frailey defended a client from a trademark dispute using the Archive's Wayback Machine. The attorneys were able to demonstrate that the claims made by the plaintiff were invalid, based on the content of their web site from several years prior. The plaintiff, Healthcare Advocates, then amended their complaint to include the Internet Archive, accusing the organization of copyright infringement as well as violations of the DMCA and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Healthcare Advocates claimed that, since they had installed a robots.txt file on their web site, even if after the initial lawsuit was filed, the Archive should have removed all previous copies of the plaintiff web site from the Wayback Machine. The lawsuit was settled out of court.
|
Who did Healthcare advocates change their case to include as a defendant?
|
{
"answer_start": [
359
],
"text": [
"Internet Archive"
]
}
|
56ddd58e66d3e219004dad10
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2003, Harding Earley Follmer & Frailey defended a client from a trademark dispute using the Archive's Wayback Machine. The attorneys were able to demonstrate that the claims made by the plaintiff were invalid, based on the content of their web site from several years prior. The plaintiff, Healthcare Advocates, then amended their complaint to include the Internet Archive, accusing the organization of copyright infringement as well as violations of the DMCA and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Healthcare Advocates claimed that, since they had installed a robots.txt file on their web site, even if after the initial lawsuit was filed, the Archive should have removed all previous copies of the plaintiff web site from the Wayback Machine. The lawsuit was settled out of court.
|
What laws did Healthcare Advocates accuse Internet Archive of having broken?
|
{
"answer_start": [
454
],
"text": [
"the DMCA and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act"
]
}
|
5a6b244ea9e0c9001a4e9f00
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2003, Harding Earley Follmer & Frailey defended a client from a trademark dispute using the Archive's Wayback Machine. The attorneys were able to demonstrate that the claims made by the plaintiff were invalid, based on the content of their web site from several years prior. The plaintiff, Healthcare Advocates, then amended their complaint to include the Internet Archive, accusing the organization of copyright infringement as well as violations of the DMCA and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Healthcare Advocates claimed that, since they had installed a robots.txt file on their web site, even if after the initial lawsuit was filed, the Archive should have removed all previous copies of the plaintiff web site from the Wayback Machine. The lawsuit was settled out of court.
|
Which law firm leveaged the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act to protect their client in 2003?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b244ea9e0c9001a4e9f01
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2003, Harding Earley Follmer & Frailey defended a client from a trademark dispute using the Archive's Wayback Machine. The attorneys were able to demonstrate that the claims made by the plaintiff were invalid, based on the content of their web site from several years prior. The plaintiff, Healthcare Advocates, then amended their complaint to include the Internet Archive, accusing the organization of copyright infringement as well as violations of the DMCA and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Healthcare Advocates claimed that, since they had installed a robots.txt file on their web site, even if after the initial lawsuit was filed, the Archive should have removed all previous copies of the plaintiff web site from the Wayback Machine. The lawsuit was settled out of court.
|
Which company filed suit against Harding Early Follmer & Frailey?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b244ea9e0c9001a4e9f02
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2003, Harding Earley Follmer & Frailey defended a client from a trademark dispute using the Archive's Wayback Machine. The attorneys were able to demonstrate that the claims made by the plaintiff were invalid, based on the content of their web site from several years prior. The plaintiff, Healthcare Advocates, then amended their complaint to include the Internet Archive, accusing the organization of copyright infringement as well as violations of the DMCA and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Healthcare Advocates claimed that, since they had installed a robots.txt file on their web site, even if after the initial lawsuit was filed, the Archive should have removed all previous copies of the plaintiff web site from the Wayback Machine. The lawsuit was settled out of court.
|
Who did Healthcare advocates change their case to include as a plaintiff?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b244ea9e0c9001a4e9f03
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2003, Harding Earley Follmer & Frailey defended a client from a trademark dispute using the Archive's Wayback Machine. The attorneys were able to demonstrate that the claims made by the plaintiff were invalid, based on the content of their web site from several years prior. The plaintiff, Healthcare Advocates, then amended their complaint to include the Internet Archive, accusing the organization of copyright infringement as well as violations of the DMCA and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Healthcare Advocates claimed that, since they had installed a robots.txt file on their web site, even if after the initial lawsuit was filed, the Archive should have removed all previous copies of the plaintiff web site from the Wayback Machine. The lawsuit was settled out of court.
|
What laws did Healthcare Advocates accuse Early Follmer & Frailey of having broken?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
5a6b244ea9e0c9001a4e9f04
|
Wayback_Machine
|
In 2003, Harding Earley Follmer & Frailey defended a client from a trademark dispute using the Archive's Wayback Machine. The attorneys were able to demonstrate that the claims made by the plaintiff were invalid, based on the content of their web site from several years prior. The plaintiff, Healthcare Advocates, then amended their complaint to include the Internet Archive, accusing the organization of copyright infringement as well as violations of the DMCA and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Healthcare Advocates claimed that, since they had installed a robots.txt file on their web site, even if after the initial lawsuit was filed, the Archive should have removed all previous copies of the plaintiff web site from the Wayback Machine. The lawsuit was settled out of court.
|
What should Early Follmer & Frailey have removed?
|
{
"answer_start": [],
"text": []
}
|
56ddd60966d3e219004dad15
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Robots.txt is used as part of the Robots Exclusion Standard, a voluntary protocol the Internet Archive respects that disallows bots from indexing certain pages delineated by its creator as off-limits. As a result, the Internet Archive has rendered unavailable a number of web sites that now are inaccessible through the Wayback Machine. Currently, the Internet Archive applies robots.txt rules retroactively; if a site blocks the Internet Archive, such as Healthcare Advocates, any previously archived pages from the domain are rendered unavailable as well. In cases of blocked sites, only the robots.txt file is archived.
|
What kind of protocol is the Robots Exclusion Standard?
|
{
"answer_start": [
63
],
"text": [
"voluntary"
]
}
|
56ddd60966d3e219004dad16
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Robots.txt is used as part of the Robots Exclusion Standard, a voluntary protocol the Internet Archive respects that disallows bots from indexing certain pages delineated by its creator as off-limits. As a result, the Internet Archive has rendered unavailable a number of web sites that now are inaccessible through the Wayback Machine. Currently, the Internet Archive applies robots.txt rules retroactively; if a site blocks the Internet Archive, such as Healthcare Advocates, any previously archived pages from the domain are rendered unavailable as well. In cases of blocked sites, only the robots.txt file is archived.
|
What file is utilized to exercise the rights promoted by the Robots Exclusion Standard?
|
{
"answer_start": [
0
],
"text": [
"Robots.txt"
]
}
|
56ddd60966d3e219004dad17
|
Wayback_Machine
|
Robots.txt is used as part of the Robots Exclusion Standard, a voluntary protocol the Internet Archive respects that disallows bots from indexing certain pages delineated by its creator as off-limits. As a result, the Internet Archive has rendered unavailable a number of web sites that now are inaccessible through the Wayback Machine. Currently, the Internet Archive applies robots.txt rules retroactively; if a site blocks the Internet Archive, such as Healthcare Advocates, any previously archived pages from the domain are rendered unavailable as well. In cases of blocked sites, only the robots.txt file is archived.
|
If a site prevents Internet Archive from recording it, what file is still saved?
|
{
"answer_start": [
0
],
"text": [
"Robots.txt"
]
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.