Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 158 posts

Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like

#21

Post by wobbly_bush »

Nextgrid wrote: post #15
Bellend wrote: post #14

I used to use paypal for everything but it occurred to me that I haven't used it since 2018. What niche does it support that direct payments don't? When I think of paypal, I think of delays.

When it comes to banking there are a lot of modern "shortcuts" that make it safe and painless pretty much everywhere in the world. The problem is that there's also a lot of inertia. For every "shortcut" user, there are hundreds if not thousands of users who don't know about and use sub-par systems (such as PayPal) instead. Shitty companies like PayPal (or various banks which still charge insane fees for wire/ACH tran…

> When it comes to banking there are a lot of modern "shortcuts" that make it safe and painless pretty much everywhere in the world.

Can you elaborate what shortcuts are you referring to in this context?

Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like

#22

Post by sieabahlpark »

CodeSgt wrote: post #16
torstenvl wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They won't pull it from a linked account, just your PayPal balance... for now. "You acknowledge and agree that $2,500.00 U.S. dollars per violation of the Acceptable Use Policy is presently a reasonable minimum estimate of PayPal’s actual damages.... PayPal may deduct such damages directly from any existing balance in any PayPal account you control." https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/useragreement-full#...

Hmm. And what do they do if you don't maintain a $2500 balance in any linked accounts? Do they send it to collections? Garnish any received money recieved to the account until the amount is paid in full? Both?

No post body was provided.

Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like

#24

Post by quickthrowman »

user3939382 wrote: post #5

Remember the guy who collected tens of thousands of dollars for Katrina victims and PayPal just closed their account and stole all the money? This POS company is a blight on humanity. Neither their executives nor the government officials that should be regulating them care, since they’re all laughing all the way to the bank.

> Remember the guy who collected tens of thousands of dollars for Katrina victims and PayPal just closed their account and stole all the money?

I do remember that guy, his name was Richard “Lowtax” Kyanka (he died). PayPal offered to donate the money to United Way, and Lowtax refused. The money was refunded by PayPal to the donators minus forex fees[0].

[0] https://www.wired.com/2005/09/paypal-freezes-out-katrina-aid...

Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like

#26

Post by parker_mountain »

quickthrowman wrote: post #24
user3939382 wrote: post #5

Remember the guy who collected tens of thousands of dollars for Katrina victims and PayPal just closed their account and stole all the money? This POS company is a blight on humanity. Neither their executives nor the government officials that should be regulating them care, since they’re all laughing all the way to the bank.

> Remember the guy who collected tens of thousands of dollars for Katrina victims and PayPal just closed their account and stole all the money? I do remember that guy, his name was Richard “Lowtax” Kyanka (he died). PayPal offered to donate the money to United Way, and Lowtax refused. The money was refunded by PayPal to the donators minus forex fees[0]. [0] https://www.wired.com/2005/09/paypal-freezes-out-katrina-aid…

> PayPal offered to donate the money to United Way, and Lowtax refused

It's important to remember why Lowtax refused:

>The Paypal representative said they can only donate money to the United Way; you know, the organization where the president was sued for stealing half a million dollars from them. You know, the organization with a loathsome two star rating, that spends nearly double the amount of money in "administrative overhead" (read: advertising) as Red Cross. It turns out that this is what the United Way is famous for. They weasel their way into companies and sign contracts with them, blocking the corporations from accepting donations to any other charity. I guess it's fitting Paypal chose to team up with them.

https://www.somethingawful.com/news/paypal-fiasco-summary/

Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like

#27

Post by Ferrotin »

mhb wrote: post #8

This does not seem to be accurate. I couldn't find anything in their TOS other than reasonable sounding restrictions on what can be sold. Sorry. https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/useragreement-full https://www.paypal.com/us/legalhub/acceptableuse-full

It is right there in the second link:

> (f) the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory

Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like

#28

Post by lilsoso »

mhb wrote: post #8

This does not seem to be accurate. I couldn't find anything in their TOS other than reasonable sounding restrictions on what can be sold. Sorry. https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/useragreement-full https://www.paypal.com/us/legalhub/acceptableuse-full

See https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/useragreement-full and search for 2,500, which reveals: "You acknowledge and agree that $2,500.00 U.S. dollars per violation of the Acceptable Use Policy is presently a reasonable minimum estimate of PayPal’s actual damages".

So it depends on the interpretation of the Acceptable Use Policy and how that policy changes over time.

edit: As the person below me points out, the acceptable use policy is defined at https://www.paypal.com/us/legalhub/acceptableuse-full, which includes obscenity and intolerance.

Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like

#29

Post by lilsoso »

lilsoso wrote: post #28
mhb wrote: post #8

This does not seem to be accurate. I couldn't find anything in their TOS other than reasonable sounding restrictions on what can be sold. Sorry. https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/useragreement-full https://www.paypal.com/us/legalhub/acceptableuse-full

See https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/useragreement-full and search for 2,500, which reveals: "You acknowledge and agree that $2,500.00 U.S. dollars per violation of the Acceptable Use Policy is presently a reasonable minimum estimate of PayPal’s actual damages". So it depends on the interpretation of the Acceptable Use Policy and how that policy changes over time. edit: As the person below me points out, the…

Imagine Robert Mapplethorpe being fined $2,500 per photo by PayPal for obscenity: definitions drift over time.

Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like

#30

Post by mhb »

Ferrotin wrote: post #27
mhb wrote: post #8

This does not seem to be accurate. I couldn't find anything in their TOS other than reasonable sounding restrictions on what can be sold. Sorry. https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/useragreement-full https://www.paypal.com/us/legalhub/acceptableuse-full

It is right there in the second link: > (f) the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory

Ah. OK. Thanks.
Post reply on HN