here.
The author of that site lists a few reasons why website owners don't want their content cached. One is that while you can prevent scraping of your site by restricting access from the same IP address to a reasonable amount, the scraper can go to the cache instead.
Ironically, Google is relying exactly on this technique for restricting access to book pages in their "partner program"...
Another is that as an author, you want to keep the right to change your mind. If I change something stupid I wrote in this blog, I don't necessarily want 1001 cache sites to preserve the original version I don't endorse anymore.
The protest site author also says that some website owners might be interested in knowing who accesses their sites. I am not sure about that, but certainly website owners (and their advertisers) want to know how many readers they have.
Also having your page accessed instead of the Google cache gives you the power to send readers to some Goatse-like page or a competitor of the site linking to you with a redirect if you don't like the origin of a particular link to your site. I am not quite sure if that is an interest worthy of protection, however.
Posted by Karl-Friedrich Lenz at February 9, 2006 02:06 PM