Google has initiated a legal action against SerpApi in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, asserting that the firm has devised strategies to circumvent the protections Google has implemented to deter automated scraping of search results and the copyrighted content therein.
Distinctive Nature of the Case
Unlike prior litigations that primarily addressed violations of terms of service or generalized scraping practices, Google’s complaint is predicated on the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) anti-circumvention provisions.
Google maintains that SearchGuard is a safeguard designed to regulate access to copyrighted materials featured in search outcomes.
The filing characterizes SearchGuard as a system that issues a JavaScript “challenge” to requests originating from unrecognized sources, necessitating the browser to provide certain information as a “solution.”
Launched in January, the system initially barred access to SerpApi. According to the lawsuit, SerpApi subsequently crafted measures to evade this barrier.
The complaint articulates:
“Google developed and deployed a technological measure, known as SearchGuard, that restricts access to its search results pages and the copyrighted content they contain. To continue its unauthorized usage, SerpApi devised methods to circumvent SearchGuard. Through its automated queries, SerpApi engages in numerous misrepresentations and evasions to bypass the technological safeguards established by Google. Each time such strategies are employed, SerpApi infringes upon federal law.”
Core of the Complaint: DMCA Section 1201
Central to Google’s claims is DMCA Section 1201, which penalizes the circumvention of access controls and the distribution of circumvention tools or services.
The complaint includes two distinct allegations: one addressing the act of circumvention itself (Section 1201(a)(1)), and the other concerning the “trafficking” of circumvention services or technologies (Section 1201(a)(2)). The document stipulates that Google may opt for statutory damages ranging from $200 to $2,500 per infringement.
Furthermore, the filing emphasizes that even if damages are awarded, SerpApi “reportedly generates several million dollars in annual revenue,” alongside Google’s request for an injunction to halt the purported misconduct.
Allegations Against SerpApi
Google alleges that SerpApi employed multiple tactics to circumvent SearchGuard, including the misrepresentation of request attributes (such as device type, software, or geographical location) to gain authorization for query submission.
The complaint cites comments from SerpApi’s founder, who described the process as:
“creating artificial browsers utilizing a plethora of IP addresses that Google recognizes as legitimate users.”
Google estimates that SerpApi transmits “hundreds of millions” of fabricated search requests daily, with reported growth reaching up to 25,000% over the past two years.
Focus on Licensed Content
Google’s concerns extend beyond mere “SERP data.” The issue encompasses copyrighted materials integrated within search functionalities through licensing and partnerships.
The complaint highlights that Knowledge Panels “frequently feature copyrighted images that Google acquires from third parties,” along with other instances, such as merchant-provided product images in Shopping and external imagery utilized in Maps.
Google maintains that SerpApi “scrape[s] this copyrighted material and more from Google” and sells it to customers for profit, without authorizations or compensation to rights holders.
Implications for SEO Tools
For those whose workflows hinge on third-party SERP data (such as rank tracking, feature observation, and competitive analysis), this case merits close attention. Google is pursuing an injunction that could potentially sever a vital source of automated SERP access.
Larger corporations typically manage their own data collection infrastructures. However, smaller tools, customized dashboards, and internal utilities often rely on external SERP APIs, which may result in a singular point of failure should a provider be compelled to withdraw or alter its operation methods.
Context of Rising Scraping Litigation
Google’s lawsuit follows other legal actions concerning scraping and content reuse.
In October, Reddit filed a lawsuit against SerpApi and other scraping entities, alleging scraping associated with Perplexity, although Perplexity is not mentioned in Google’s complaint.
Antitrust Context
This lawsuit surfaced following Judge Amit Mehta’s August 2024 ruling on liability in the U.S. search antitrust case, with resolutions expected in 2025 and anticipated appeals.
This case revolves around distribution and default issues, whereas the current lawsuit addresses automated access to search result pages and the content housed within.
Despite differing focuses, both cases unfold within the larger discourse on the extent of control that platforms can exert over access and reuse.
Public Reactions
Responses on X have portrayed the lawsuit as a significant threat to AI tools reliant on third-party access to Google results, with one comment dubbing it “the end of ChatGPT.”
However, the legal filing and Google’s announcement are more narrowly focused on SerpApi’s alleged evasion of SearchGuard and the resale of copyrighted materials within Google’s search functionalities.
SerpApi has indicated its intent to “vigorously defend” itself and characterizes the action as an attempt to stifle competition from companies developing “next-generation AI” and other applications.
Looking Ahead
Google is seeking both monetary compensation and a court order to prevent the alleged circumvention. Additionally, it is asking for SerpApi to be compelled to destroy the technology implicated in the alleged violations.
Should the case proceed, the pivotal question will be whether SearchGuard qualifies as a DMCA-protected access control for copyrighted materials or if SerpApi will argue that it functions more akin to bot-management, potentially exempting it from Section 1201.
Source link: Searchenginejournal.com.
