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

No Terms. No Conditions

notermsnoconditions.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 149 posts

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#91

Post by janalsncm »

wrs wrote: post #83
lxgr wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently had to confirm to a brokerage that I won’t be using the money I’m withdrawing for any illegal activities. A sure sign of a legal team or possibly an entire legal system having lost the plot. Hopefully only the former.

That’s simple CYA, and also ensures you’ve not only done the illegal activity, you’ve defrauded the brokerage and breached your contract with them, and they get a weak KYC defense as well. Similar to the “Al Capone” instructions from the IRS: >Income from illegal activities, such as money from dealing illegal drugs, must be included in your income on Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 8z, or on Schedule C (Form 1040) if fr…

I still don’t understand the CYA though.

For the majority of banks, they do not want people to conduct illegal activity via their bank. For the minority of banks which don’t mind it, nothing stops them from adding the clause anyways. A cartel bank probably cannot use the existence of the clause as a defense if they’re still allowing illegal activity.

If the purpose is to allow the bank to terminate accounts suspected of illegal activity, my assumption is they can already terminate for much less than that.

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#92

Post by awesome_dude »

volemo wrote: post #85
awesome_dude wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Right? Why include that? The law automatically applies. Because the law applies - by that I mean if you don't put a disclaimer in then the law takes the view that you do provide a warranty, etc.

Does it take the view that I encourage/facilitate illegal use of my product unless I state otherwise in the T&C?

Ask every account that has ever released information on drug use, lock picking, explosives manufacture, or "hacking" - they all say "for educational purposes only" for a damned good reason

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#93

Post by [deleted] »

weinzierl wrote: post #20

Just today I asked an LLM: "Often one generation values things much more than others. Boomers and their wristwatches. One generation is like 'only from my cold dead hands,' the others 'what would I even need this for?!' What are examples of things the youngest generation did away with? " If OP were a checklist, the answer would have checked every point.

[deleted]

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#94

Post by greycol »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #70
spalzdog wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it's in the contract, then it means that when you break the law you both break the law and the contract. SHould it be necessary? Perhaps not, but in some places that makes a meaningful difference.

Now I'm paranoid. To your knowledge, which places does it make a difference, and what difference does it make?

In most places it doesn't make a difference to the outcome of the legal process what it does do is give you a quicker simpler off ramp from the legal process (which reduces costs) and may stop some idiots even trying to sue in the first place.

"Do not iron clothes while on body" should not be required to not be found liable, but it does change the question in court from providing discovery for safety consideration, how comprehensive is the manual, how... and the costs involved with that to "Did the customer use the device in a way that was it was clearly labelled to not be used? Did any part of the product packaging or instructions contradict this warning? ...Dismissed".

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#95

Post by wrs »

janalsncm wrote: post #91
wrs wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s simple CYA, and also ensures you’ve not only done the illegal activity, you’ve defrauded the brokerage and breached your contract with them, and they get a weak KYC defense as well. Similar to the “Al Capone” instructions from the IRS: >Income from illegal activities, such as money from dealing illegal drugs, must be included in your income on Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 8z, or on Schedule C (Form 1040) if fr…

I still don’t understand the CYA though. For the majority of banks, they do not want people to conduct illegal activity via their bank. For the minority of banks which don’t mind it, nothing stops them from adding the clause anyways. A cartel bank probably cannot use the existence of the clause as a defense if they’re still allowing illegal activity. If the purpose is to allow the bank to terminate accounts suspected…

It’s not just that they don’t want it, it’s that they’re liable for it themselves if they should have known it was happening. Asking you adds one more small layer of “we discouraged illegal activity and we didn’t know about any”.

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#96

Post by zephen »

tempestn wrote: post #69
zephen wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I will not argue with you about how obvious it is. Good. Don't. Because it is exceedingly plain, if concise, English.

I'm guessing it means that your use of the website is not contingent on you accepting (approving of) the terms presented. But there are plenty of other ways it could be reasonably interpreted. For instance, your access of the website is not contingent on the website operator approving said access.

> I'm guessing it means that your use of the website is not contingent on you accepting

I don't think it says that at all. Because "accepting" is the right word for this interpretation, as you point out. "Approval" is a different thing altogether. You can accept something without approving of it -- that's the main message in the Serenity Prayer and hundreds of self-help books that try to reframe that message, maybe to help it sink in, maybe just to grift a little.

If it was literally spelled out as "Your access is not conditioned on your approval" that could almost be taken as a threat -- you will access this whether you want to or not.

> For instance, your access of the website is not contingent on the website operator approving said access.

To me, this is clearly what it says. "(Your) access is not conditioned on (our) approval."

But, of course, since you read it differently, I have to agree that perhaps it's not as clear as I thought.

However...

Contracts and agreements, if ambiguous, are always interpreted in a light most favorable to the party who didn't draft them.

So, absolute worst case (for the website owner), if we combine your reading and mine, it reads "Your access is not conditioned on either your approval of these terms, or our approval of you."

Somehow, I think the author is OK with this.

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#97

Post by [deleted] »

lxgr wrote: post #46
goodmythical wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right? Why include that? The law automatically applies. Including it in the license is just redundant. Had it simply read "You may use this site for any purpose." or "You may use this site." or "You may use this" or "This can be used." it would have the same level actual restriciton in that you obviously aren't allowed to use it to break the law regardless of what it actually says. And, having typed all that, I reali…

I recently had to confirm to a brokerage that I won’t be using the money I’m withdrawing for any illegal activities. A sure sign of a legal team or possibly an entire legal system having lost the plot. Hopefully only the former.

[deleted]

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#98

Post by abustamam »

wrs wrote: post #83
lxgr wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently had to confirm to a brokerage that I won’t be using the money I’m withdrawing for any illegal activities. A sure sign of a legal team or possibly an entire legal system having lost the plot. Hopefully only the former.

That’s simple CYA, and also ensures you’ve not only done the illegal activity, you’ve defrauded the brokerage and breached your contract with them, and they get a weak KYC defense as well. Similar to the “Al Capone” instructions from the IRS: >Income from illegal activities, such as money from dealing illegal drugs, must be included in your income on Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 8z, or on Schedule C (Form 1040) if fr…

I'm curious if anyone has ever said yes to income from illegal activities. Moreover, I wonder if something like this would be protected under 5th amendment.

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#99

Post by 9dev »

dbvn wrote: post #81
layer8 wrote: post #42

> By accessing or using this site, you acknowledge and accept the following terms. I’m pretty sure this is already questionable in the EU.

[flagged]

Who is "we"? Given the EU is the single largest foreign market openly accessible to the USA and all that money y’all invested into your pension ETFs needs constant growth to avoid shrinking, and the EU is your best bet on that… I’d recommend not ignoring us :-)

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#100

Post by abustamam »

greycol wrote: post #94
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now I'm paranoid. To your knowledge, which places does it make a difference, and what difference does it make?

In most places it doesn't make a difference to the outcome of the legal process what it does do is give you a quicker simpler off ramp from the legal process (which reduces costs) and may stop some idiots even trying to sue in the first place. "Do not iron clothes while on body" should not be required to not be found liable, but it does change the question in court from providing discovery for safety consideration, h…

On top of that, I think my canister of Lysol wet wipes and many other bottles of cleaning chemicals says something like "it is against federal law to use this product for any purposes other than its intended use"

Like, yeah it's illegal to do illegal stuff with or without the label, but at least Lysol could say "we did tell him that he can't use it for that."

Post reply on HN