5 ms·

> in exchange for payment under certain terms. What terms? I can go to youtube.com right now without an account, without accepting any agreement or contract,

> in exchange for payment under certain terms. What terms? I can go to youtube.com right now without an account, without accepting any agreement or contract, click on a video and it will send data to my computer. How I process that data on my computer is entirely up to me and not anyone else.

acdha 3y ago
Your use of YouTube is contingent on the terms of service offered: https://www.youtube.com/t/terms https://www.youtube.com/t/terms It’s true that you aren’t required to create an account but also true that you have no standing to complain if they start blocking access when they detect that you aren’t following their terms. It’s private property so it’s their rules.
- josephcsible 3y ago
  By reading this comment, you agree to my Terms of Service. My Terms of Service are that you must send me $100.
  - Qwertious 3y ago
    Oh, fuck. Where do I send the $100?
  - acdha 3y ago
    Okay, now try to construct something which is actually a valid comparison: If you don’t respond to this comment politely, I won’t reply. Nobody is saying YouTube can arbitrarily bill you - only that they’re entirely within their rights to stop giving you free things if you don’t follow their terms of service for use of their private property.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- BeetleB 3y ago
  Is there any example of a court case where they ruled that users are bound to those types of terms when they didn't explicitly opt in? Can I really set up a blog, put an obscure Terms of Service link somewhere, and legally obligate anyone who reads a single blog post to follow those terms - even if they never clicked the link? I somewhat doubt it.
  - acdha 3y ago
    There have been a number of cases holding that it’s not criminal as long as you aren’t knowingly impacting service to others (e.g. Oracle v. Rimini). Similarly, I can’t put in a “you owe me one million dollars” clause and expect to collect unless I can prove that you knew about it and agreed. That’s not what’s being argued here, though: YouTube isn’t taking people to court, they’re just enforcing their terms better. Some people don’t like that and are trying to invent some legal right to continue accessing that content, but that simply doesn’t exist.
b112 3y ago
Yes, but google doesn't have to send you anything. EG, they can decide not to, if you aren't looking at ads, or in their workflow, or using their app, and those may be their terms.
- primordz 3y ago
  Sure, but as long as they offer public access to their data I will keep consuming it the way I want to, without any ethical, moral or legal issues.

acdha 3y ago

Your use of YouTube is contingent on the terms of service offered: https://www.youtube.com/t/terms https://www.youtube.com/t/terms It’s true that you aren’t required to create an account but also true that you have no standing to complain if they start blocking access when they detect that you aren’t following their terms. It’s private property so it’s their rules.

josephcsible 3y ago
By reading this comment, you agree to my Terms of Service. My Terms of Service are that you must send me $100.
- Qwertious 3y ago
  Oh, fuck. Where do I send the $100?
- acdha 3y ago
  Okay, now try to construct something which is actually a valid comparison: If you don’t respond to this comment politely, I won’t reply. Nobody is saying YouTube can arbitrarily bill you - only that they’re entirely within their rights to stop giving you free things if you don’t follow their terms of service for use of their private property.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
BeetleB 3y ago
Is there any example of a court case where they ruled that users are bound to those types of terms when they didn't explicitly opt in? Can I really set up a blog, put an obscure Terms of Service link somewhere, and legally obligate anyone who reads a single blog post to follow those terms - even if they never clicked the link? I somewhat doubt it.
- acdha 3y ago
  There have been a number of cases holding that it’s not criminal as long as you aren’t knowingly impacting service to others (e.g. Oracle v. Rimini). Similarly, I can’t put in a “you owe me one million dollars” clause and expect to collect unless I can prove that you knew about it and agreed. That’s not what’s being argued here, though: YouTube isn’t taking people to court, they’re just enforcing their terms better. Some people don’t like that and are trying to invent some legal right to continue accessing that content, but that simply doesn’t exist.

b112 3y ago

Yes, but google doesn't have to send you anything. EG, they can decide not to, if you aren't looking at ads, or in their workflow, or using their app, and those may be their terms.

primordz 3y ago
Sure, but as long as they offer public access to their data I will keep consuming it the way I want to, without any ethical, moral or legal issues.