4 ms·
Saying “The updates do not change any of our commitments or policies” while rewriting a contract is just a contradiction. It’s literally impossible to rewrite
by ballenf 7y ago
Saying “The updates do not change any of our commitments or policies” while rewriting a contract is just a contradiction.
It’s literally impossible to rewrite a contract and claim that its meaning or interpretation hasn’t changed. The way a legal term is phrased is hugely important especially when there is ambiguity.
I understand FB’s intent here and I don’t think the line is meant to deceive. For example, adding terms to the agreement that make the user’s acceptance of how they are monetized conditioned on usage (which has always been required but is now explicit) may have big ramifications for anyone wanting to sue FB for fraud or the like.
Easy to understand terms are a good thing, but I think it would be better to say something like “we have attempted to capture the same meaning of the prior policy while using easier to understand language” or the like would have been more accurate.
- a1369209993 7y ago> Saying "The updates do not change any of our commitments or policies" while rewriting a contract is just a contradiction. To be scrupulously fair, that could well be interpreted as "We were already committed, as a matter of policy and/or applicable law[0], to upholding these additional terms not mentioned in the previous contract, and all we're doing now is formally documenting something we were already doing.", but that would require assuming good faith on the part of Facebook of all entities, so no. 0: eg adding "We guarrantee we will provide a replacement [widget] if the one you ordered arrives damaged." in a jurisdiction where that's legally required anyway.