I assume you are only referring to the LinkedIn losing part of my comment. It would be nice if your comment was more specific to this. Thank you for sharing the link though, I recall seeing that page too

As I understand it, OP built a no-code browser automation extension, which can be used to create a LinkedIn automation. It does not come with this ability out of the box, though it seems easy to install: https://browserflow.app/shared/1ac2a868-02ac-4435-a91f-b0203...

I'm not convinced that LinkedIn has a solid case for Cease and Desist. The court didn't find that someone cannot _build_ such a tool, only that they cannot run it (_conditions & nuances_). OP is not running any such scraping service (except maybe during development), and it is in fact a user of the browser extension who would be violating the ToS. This is not unique to Browserflow and the same situation could exist for any browser automation tool.

That being said, LinkedIn (Microsoft) could bury OP in legal fees, so decide if you want to die on that hill...

Maybe OP could create a community hub and use 230 to shield them self from user submissions of LinkedIn automations?

Read the link; there's plenty of detail there. Not going to comment on the specifics of OP's case in a public forum, but if the OP wants a free consult, I'll do that.

They don't need a case for a C&D. All a C&D does is put the receiving party on notice. They aren't enforceable. What makes them meaningful is that they suggest LinkedIn might sue in the future (or take other adverse action).