39 ms·
And that's not to mention the fact that each user had effectively "signed" a TOS agreement that no doubt covers these sorts of scenarios. Informed consent (as I
by colbyh 12y ago
And that's not to mention the fact that each user had effectively "signed" a TOS agreement that no doubt covers these sorts of scenarios. Informed consent (as I understand it, might very well be wrong) is given if the user in question had the materials made available to them for a sufficient enough time frame to understand both scope and intent.
You could probably argue that legalese pushes the boundary of "understanding scope and intent", but included in every TOS is a contact link for a user to learn more and ask questions so I'd be surprised if there was legal footing for that complaint.
The ethical nature of what they did is certainly in question, but I just don't see how one could declare either action "illegal".
EDIT: s/signs/signed/
- revelation 12y agoA TOS isn't a magic legal document you can fill with whatever you want. It might be in the USA, but in Europe any out of the ordinary clauses are regularly laughed out of court.
- lutusp 12y agoThe U.S. has a similar system. Many contracts contain what lawyers call "unconscionable" clauses or conditions, meaning if the signer actually understood the contract, he wouldn't have entered into it. Such contracts are probably laughed out of court as often here as in Europe.
- aidenn0 12y agoMany of them are unenforceable in the USA too. For contracts that are not negotiable (like EULA or TOS), and which one side has a lot more legal expertise than the other (e.g. corporation vs. random citizen), the restrictions on what is enforceable are significant. Two corporations that sit down and hash out a mutual contract have much less restrictions though.