I think I figured out what Laur is trying to convey with her Pepe Silvia exhibit of multiple lolcow snaps and a single image from Kiwifarms: see where she printed "DATASCRAPED" on the screnshots from lolcow and Kiwi, and "WHAT IT SHOULD LOOK LIKE" on her view of the court docket?
Laur thinks it is impossible to look at a public court docket without performing some sort of black hat hacking, and her "proof" of nefarious activity is that her desktop view of the docket differs from the screenshots taken by others of the docket. This is what she (or at least, Gemini) is calling "illegal data scraping".
Laur, hon? You are logged into the court case search system on a desktop or laptop. You are also a party to the case. That is why you see the beige colored website background, and each document has an alternating beige and lighter beige background and the word "un-redacted" next to the filings. Anyone who is logged in on a desktop likely sees the same, and the other party to the case logged in will see exactly what you do.
When you case search as a guest (i.e. don't log in) on mobile (as in, no desktop or laptop) as a member of the public (i.e. not a party to the case), the background of the website is white. Any member of the public can bring up the website
https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcivil on their phone, type in your name, and see the following:
It is not illegal to view and discuss public documents from court cases and FOIA requests. That's a first amendment right.
As for what she was thinking by submitting a portion of the most recent lolcow thread on her history, I can't figure that out. Note that each link in the screnshot is purple, meaning Laur has clicked on every single link. Maybe if she spent less time reading about people laughing at her and more time earning income, she wouldn't be evicted into the cold February streets.
Finally, borrowed from lolcow: Laur's e-bay reviews are appalling. She treats her customers about as well as she does her landlord, and regularly rips people off.
