3 ms·

This is somewhat fair, but only as long as you agree that you then have no right to use these services. I think there is a big difference between the EULA that

This is somewhat fair, but only as long as you agree that you then have no right to use these services. I think there is a big difference between the EULA that comes attached to a product you've already paid for, that represents additional terms to what you had already agreed to when paying, and the T&C of a free service or a subscription, presented before payment. You can't seriously claim that you have a right to use, say, YouTube without any restriction whatsoever. It is a private service, and you can either use it under the terms and conditions that its private owner establishes, or you can avoid using it at all.

fc417fc802 8mo ago
> You can't seriously claim that you have a right to use, say, YouTube without any restriction whatsoever. I think it would be reasonable for the regulator to establish hard limits on what any such restrictions are permitted to entail. You know, basic consumer protection laws.
- tsimionescu 8mo ago
  Absolutely, but that's a completely different claim than what GP was saying. They were saying that there is no binding agreement that you enter to just by using a product that has T&Cs shown on the screen.