1. 18
  1.  

  2. 3

    It’s interesting how the HTTP protocol specifications are ignored by nearly everyone. I’ve never seen any 451, just 404.

    1. 8

      Try browsing a US newspaper site from the EU. Many use 451 to passive-aggressively protest against GDPR requirements.

      1. 3

        It was approved by the IESG on December 18, 2015.[9] It was published as RFC 7725 in February 2016.

        It’s pretty recent so I’m not surprised it’s not widely picked up yet.

        Also, 404 isn’t wrong in these cases, 451 is just more specific. Usually telling “this thing is not there” is easier than also figuring out the reason why.

        1. 2

          What about the case when the resource is publically available, but not for the requester for legal reasons (e.g. being in a European country)? In that case, does the 404 status still make sense?

          1. 1

            No, but I wasn’t thinking about that case, as parent mentioned 404 (I actually did, but quite a bit later after I wrote that comment). In absence of 451, 403 would be suitable in situation you mentioned, but 451 is much less ambiguous for these cases.

      2. 2

        Send 418 instead

          1. 0

            Eventually, blockchains are going to need this.