Law note · Colorado
Colorado Consumer Protection Act, unfair or deceptive trade practices
What it asks of an app
- A scraping practice that is knowingly or recklessly unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive can plausibly expose you to a Section 6-1-105(1)(rrr) claim, though no Colorado case has tested this against a scraping fact pattern.
When LexLint raises it
crawls_web
What we found
Section 6-1-105 lists specific deceptive trade practices, and paragraph (1)(rrr) reaches anyone who knowingly or recklessly engages in any unfair, unconscionable, deceptive, deliberately misleading, false, or fraudulent act or practice, broad language structurally comparable to California's UCL.
No Colorado scraping case has ever been brought under this statute, and no Colorado case applies common-law trespass to chattels to a scraping fact pattern either, so whether Colorado would require actual system harm, as California does post-Hamidi, or a lower showing, is unsettled. Paragraph (1)(rrr) is a 2022 addition, confirmed against the official Colorado Revised Statutes: HB 22-1287 repealed the former paragraph (1)(kkk) and added the current (1)(rrr) in its place.