> hiQ argued That does not mean that hte court agreed. The judges said that CFAA doesn't apply. In other words, the judges said that LinkedIn couldn't use t

> hiQ argued That does not mean that hte court agreed. The judges said that CFAA doesn't apply. In other words, the judges said that LinkedIn couldn't use the US legal system to force HiQ to stop. Judges didn't say that LinkedIn was barred from using technical measures. The court did allow a preliminary injunction against LinkedIn, due to the possibility of "monopolies" (to be determined in Court later), pending resolution of that latter question. LinkedIn might still win their claim to their right to block scrapers via technical means.