4 ms·

it isn't for you solely/exclusively. If it "improves" the service for everyone - that includes "you".

• gnicholas 3y ago
  Yep, I acknowledge that is a possibility, but it would also lead to them having permission to display literally the entirety of my videonconf calls to anyone, for advertising purposes or some other purpose that only incidentally benefits me. That would be a strained reading IMO.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • Guvante 3y ago
    Additionally courts consider the fact that users have little if any say in the terms and thus tend to take the most restrictive but still reasonable view of any uncertainty in the terms. Basically "if you wanted it you could have asked for it, if you didn't then that is a problem".
    • gnicholas 3y ago
      Yep, contracts of adhesion, and construing against the drafter: both favor the user here.
  • turbojerry 3y ago
    To misquote Bill Clinton, it depends on what the means of 'you' is.
  • benatkin 3y ago
    More like a certainty :)