Was any (public) Internet archive&#39;s snapshot ever accepted as an evidence in a legal procedure, except patents?
<p>This question is bugging my mind already for a while, and all of my attempts to find such a case failed horribly so far. I am simply unable to dig up any traces of a court decision - whether in US, Europe, whatever - that would feature an Internet archive (archive.org, Wayback Machine, and so on) snapshot of a web page - or an element on a web page - being decisive in any legal proceeding, except for patents.</p>

<p>Are you aware of such a case?</p>

<h2><a href="https://www.griffithhack.com/ideas/insights/time-travel-in-the-federal-court-of-australia-wayback-machine-print-outs-admissible-as-evidence/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Yes</a></h2>

<p><a href="https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2019/2019fca1552" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dyno Nobel Inc v Orica Explosives Technology Pty Ltd (No 2) [2019] FCA 1552</a></p>

<p>I think you can answer "yes" to your question, but pointing out specific examples will take a bit of effort. Anyway, <a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/?q=%22archive.org%22+OR+%22Internet+Archive%22+or+%22Wayback+Machine%22+-casename%3A%22Internet+Archive%22&amp;type=r&amp;order_by=score+desc" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here's about 3300 filings from about 2000 cases in federal court that mention the Internet Archive</a>.</p>

evidence online court-records