4 ms·
Would the "Limitations on Liability" section on their TOS help them in this case? FREE ACCOUNT HOLDERS: YOU AGREE THAT THE AGGREGATE LIABILITY OF DROPBOX TO YO
by sadlyNess 15y ago
Would the "Limitations on Liability" section on their TOS help them in this case?
FREE ACCOUNT HOLDERS: YOU AGREE THAT THE AGGREGATE LIABILITY OF DROPBOX TO YOU FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING FROM THE USE OF THE SITE, CONTENT, FILES AND/OR SERVICES IS LIMITED TO TWENTY ($20) U.S. DOLLARS. THE LIMITATIONS OF DAMAGES SET FORTH ABOVE ARE FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTS OF THE BASIS OF THE BARGAIN BETWEEN DROPBOX AND YOU.
PREMIUM ACCOUNT HOLDERS: YOU AGREE THAT THE AGGREGATE LIABILITY OF DROPBOX TO YOU FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING FROM THE USE OF THE SITE, CONTENT, FILES AND/OR SERVICES IS LIMITED TO LOWER OF THE AMOUNTS YOU HAVE PAID TO DROPBOX DURING THE THREE MONTH PERIOD PRIOR TO SUCH CLAIM, FOR ACCESS TO AND USE OF THE SITE, CONTENT, FILES OR SERVICES, OR ONE-HUNDRED ($100) DOLLARS. THE LIMITATIONS OF DAMAGES SET FORTH ABOVE ARE FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTS OF THE BASIS OF THE BARGAIN BETWEEN DROPBOX AND YOU.
- matt1 15y agoI'd love to hear a professional chime in here. Does adding this to your Terms of Service actually have an impact? If the answer is yes, why are the woman and her lawyer suing Dropbox anyway? And if no, why do most Terms of Service include similar wording?
- acangiano 15y agoMy guess, and IANAL, is that it would hold in many courts, but not in Californian ones. California seems to have little tolerance for contracts that restrict basic freedoms (e.g., non-compete agreements.) In this case the basic freedom is to be compensated according to the tort perpetrated, and not limited to a specified arbitrary amount.
- tptacek 15y agoMy understanding is that these contract terms have teeth in California, just like everywhere else. An enforceable contract doesn't mean you can't sue Dropbox if they cough up your data to an attacker; it just means you sue for a tort instead of breach-of-contract.