Lawyers generally copy each other. There is standard text which has gone through hundreds or thousands of litigations and hasn't done harm, and that's almost always used going forward.
A lot of oddball conventions, such as THE USE OF ALL-CAPS in specific places, which have no reason to be legally meaningful, but are always done.
Some of them do turn out to be important. Standard clauses build up over time.
I think plaintiffs are right in this case. Google is openly breaking a number of laws, including CFAA. This constitutes unauthorized access. CFAA is a broken law with an overly-broad definition of unauthorized access, which the tech industry abuses all the time. It will be nice to see them get abused back. Perhaps they'll have incentive to fix it.
A lot of oddball conventions, such as THE USE OF ALL-CAPS in specific places, which have no reason to be legally meaningful, but are always done.
Some of them do turn out to be important. Standard clauses build up over time.
I think plaintiffs are right in this case. Google is openly breaking a number of laws, including CFAA. This constitutes unauthorized access. CFAA is a broken law with an overly-broad definition of unauthorized access, which the tech industry abuses all the time. It will be nice to see them get abused back. Perhaps they'll have incentive to fix it.