3 ms·

It’s a terms of service you opt in to. Unclear how well it holds up in court but I dare anyone to try! We will go all out making an example out of people who ab

It’s a terms of service you opt in to. Unclear how well it holds up in court but I dare anyone to try! We will go all out making an example out of people who abuse the system. So far we have not had a single report of misuse of the anti-theft feature.

nradov 3y ago
I am not a stalker, but that agreement is almost certainly unenforceable in civil court. It violates the basic principles of consideration and equity. There is extensive case law on those areas, which you might want to look into before wasting people's time making empty threats and bullshiting about subjects you clearly don't understand.
- crhulls 3y ago
  We are a public company with an audit and risk committee, multiple in-house lawyers, and external counsel. This was heavily discussed. Perhaps a court would limit the fine, but liquidated damages are a commonly used concept, and I don't think most people will tempt fate. Aggressive stalkers will buy dedicated GPS devices - this is a real roadblock.
  - nradov 3y ago
    I don't believe you. I think you're either lying, or misunderstood what your external counsel told you. If you want us to take your claim seriously then post copies of their opinion letters.
    - neom 3y ago
      "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - sgtnoodle 3y ago
    > I don't think most people will tempt fate. In so far as I would hope most people would avoid doing business with companies that mention $1 million dollar civil lawsuits in their terms of service.
  - 15155 3y ago
    > I don't think most people will tempt fate. You're right: they'll just use your far more well-established competitor without such ridiculous language.
iamleppert 3y ago
Real stalkers aren't going to care about a ToS -- they are already intent on violating criminal law. This will likely just push people to use fake/stolen ID and payment information, making it even harder to track and unravel. Your exposure to various fraud comorbidity as a result of this policy is ever likely. Additionally, most stalkers know their victims, so you are entering into a vast grey area that civil courts do not have prior established case law (vis-a-vis a third party as you are) to adjudicate and for which the burden of proof is on your lawyers who won't have the same powers to subpoena information as is available in criminal matters. It's also unlikely stalkers would have significant assets, making civil enforcement of this policy potentially very costly and time consuming for your company. Making a mistake with an enforcement action or loosing a case would be incredibly poor optics for your company. Sending a letter to your legal staff for a cursory review and getting their rubber stamp won't change the potential legal outcome for your company or shield you from liability, when (not if) the time comes, and likely opens you to substantial liability should the product be used in the service of a crime. That said, if I really want to stalk someone your app already provides everything that is needed, and in fact it is currently being used by sex traffickers and domestic violence abusers to track, stalk and exploit their victims en mass [1]. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2023/04/06/sex-traffickers-use-parenting-apps-like-life360-to-spy-on-victims/?sh=7198b9fd64c3 https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2023/04/06/sex-t...
- crhulls 3y ago
  The irony of that article is that the traffickers were sent to jail because of our app. We are unapologetic about working with law enforcement.

nradov 3y ago

I am not a stalker, but that agreement is almost certainly unenforceable in civil court. It violates the basic principles of consideration and equity. There is extensive case law on those areas, which you might want to look into before wasting people's time making empty threats and bullshiting about subjects you clearly don't understand.

crhulls 3y ago
We are a public company with an audit and risk committee, multiple in-house lawyers, and external counsel. This was heavily discussed. Perhaps a court would limit the fine, but liquidated damages are a commonly used concept, and I don't think most people will tempt fate. Aggressive stalkers will buy dedicated GPS devices - this is a real roadblock.
- nradov 3y ago
  I don't believe you. I think you're either lying, or misunderstood what your external counsel told you. If you want us to take your claim seriously then post copies of their opinion letters.
  - neom 3y ago
    "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- sgtnoodle 3y ago
  > I don't think most people will tempt fate. In so far as I would hope most people would avoid doing business with companies that mention $1 million dollar civil lawsuits in their terms of service.
- 15155 3y ago
  > I don't think most people will tempt fate. You're right: they'll just use your far more well-established competitor without such ridiculous language.

iamleppert 3y ago

Real stalkers aren't going to care about a ToS -- they are already intent on violating criminal law. This will likely just push people to use fake/stolen ID and payment information, making it even harder to track and unravel. Your exposure to various fraud comorbidity as a result of this policy is ever likely. Additionally, most stalkers know their victims, so you are entering into a vast grey area that civil courts do not have prior established case law (vis-a-vis a third party as you are) to adjudicate and for which the burden of proof is on your lawyers who won't have the same powers to subpoena information as is available in criminal matters. It's also unlikely stalkers would have significant assets, making civil enforcement of this policy potentially very costly and time consuming for your company. Making a mistake with an enforcement action or loosing a case would be incredibly poor optics for your company. Sending a letter to your legal staff for a cursory review and getting their rubber stamp won't change the potential legal outcome for your company or shield you from liability, when (not if) the time comes, and likely opens you to substantial liability should the product be used in the service of a crime. That said, if I really want to stalk someone your app already provides everything that is needed, and in fact it is currently being used by sex traffickers and domestic violence abusers to track, stalk and exploit their victims en mass [1]. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2023/04/06/sex-traffickers-use-parenting-apps-like-life360-to-spy-on-victims/?sh=7198b9fd64c3 https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2023/04/06/sex-t...

crhulls 3y ago
The irony of that article is that the traffickers were sent to jail because of our app. We are unapologetic about working with law enforcement.