NameProtect Spider?

Does anyone have any info on a spider calling itself the NameProtect Spider? What is its function and is it possible to ban it if potentially prejudicial to my site? :confused:

Any info greatly appreciated. :)

Biggles LLB

hmmmm... I've never seen that one on my site.

It's not been on mine before today either. A quick check reveals that it's not necessarily good or bad but some suggest that its primary function is to obtain information to sue you. What fun! If that's true then I shall look forward to it doing its job.

Others suggest it's not performing any function other than checking sites for infringements of trademarks, copyright etcetera. Again, if that's true I have no problem.

I really need more information about it before I make any attempt to ban. Overall, I am inclined to think that spiders are good and cause no real harm. After all, they hardly log in and post troubling stuff on websites.

your second paragraph sums it up.

Have you done a google or yahoo search on it?

your second paragraph sums it up.A man of few words is our noppid. Do you know who operates this spider, noppid? Or ain't ya gonna tell?

Yes, Ohio darlin', that's where I got the sparse info I posted above. Since it's only just appeared on the site after more than three months, I'm not too sure why it is suddenly there. I think I'll try banning it until I know more. I'm happy to see the three big boy spiders ever present, plus one or two smaller ones, but even the name of this one suggests legal activity which, in my particular case, is hardly surprising at all. Like I said, that'll be a bundle of fun. If anyone does want to sue me, I wish them luck. ;)

Biggles

P.S. Ah, found the operator's information page on its website at: http://www.nameprotect.com/botinfo.html so I think I will attempt a ban. It's a snooper for unnamed 'clients' with possible ill intent. So why make it welcome?

Name protect and copyscape IIRC are services that surf sites looking for copyright infringements and such. I have no clue as to why they would spider a site or not. I don't even know if I'm correct in the names, but I'm very certain of it's purpose.

I don't think blocking or allowing it would be of any benefit or consequence to you. If you ban it and you are in fact being audited by them, they can either do it by hand or have the bot ignore robots.txt anyway. If you do an IP ban, they would have to do an audit by hand by a person I guess.

That's about all I got on the subject though.

Thanks noppid. I appreciate the further info. If you use the link above to look at NP's robot info page, there are at least two statements made there which are a little bizarre. One is that it states that it obeys robot.txt files yet some site owners claim that it ignores them. Who knows which is right.

The second implies that it ranges randomly, inferring that it does not act on specific instructions. However, it does admit to providing information to 'clients' yet at the same time implies that no data is passed to third parties. One wonders how it provides information to clients while not passing data to third parties. In law, any client is definitely a third party insofar as the first party is NameProtect and the second party is the site owner. A client, then, is a third party.

From a legal stance, there is potential for the following: (a) NameProtect finds what it believes is an infringement; (b) NP reports same to third party client; (c) client commences legal action against site owner.

If site owner proves no infringement then NP perhaps guilty of malicious falsehood and/or defamation. Once action commenced, it is for NP to prove its undoubtedly malicious and/or defamatory statement to client was true. Incidentally, in UK law, there is no requirement in libel action for the claimant to prove special damage (pecuniary loss). Libel is actionable per se. Even in slander, if defamation damages one's professional standing then the defamation is also actionable per se (without proving special damage). US law may well be different, of course.

I have implemented a ban using IP addresses. Did not bother with robots.txt.

Having said all that, I could not give a toss about NameProtect or anyone else spidering my sites for infringements for two good reasons: 1. my sites contain demonstrable truth and do not to my knowledge anywhere infringe intellectiual right or copyright. The EI Team has paid in full for what it uses, and then some. If there was an inadvertent infringement, I would be most unhappy and offer to correct that, like yesterday; and 2. I simply ain't worth suing.

Kinda makes it an irrelevancy. Nonetheless, I don't like being spidered with possible ill intent, so I'm gonna try to maintain a ban. Thanks for the info on the other likely snooper. I'll watch out for that one too. It feels to me like a convicted felon is casing my joint - and I don't like that. What makes this company or any other think it has the right to appoint itself as an Internet police officer and go prying around in my joint without a warrant? I invited most of the other spiders here by specific invitation or by my activity. I did not invite professional snoopers looking to make a fast buck.

Cheers for now.

Biggles