When an enforced agreement can be updated at a whim one may no longer feel compelled to recognize law or those enforcing it. Pray this sentiment does not spread far and wide as citizens outnumber their masters and one day the citizens may come to realize this.
US Court of Appeals: TOS may be updated by email, use can imply consent [pdf]
121–130 of 458 posts
Re: US Court of Appeals: TOS may be updated by email, use can imply consent [pdf]
#122IMHO the problem is allowing changes to terms and conditions for existing contracts. If I have a contract with a company, that contract was made under existing T&C. The company should not be able to change those conditions without my explicit permission. Denying me service if I disagree should not be a valid option. I get this periodically on our overly-computerized car: Here are new T&C, click yes to agree. You can…
The other side of this is that companies do want to change their T&C from time to time, so what do they do, force you to quit and then sign up again? That adds a lot of friction. Or do they tag things and say "Customer X signed up on this date, so he is bound by T&C number 12, whereas this other customer signed up a year later and is bound by T&C number 13". That seems unwieldy since there is a common infrastructure.…
I'm still on a contract from 2016 or so with my mobile (cell) operator. 10 years of inflation, I pay basically nothing for some occassional data use and more voice than I could ever use.
Of course it irks them much to not be able to sell me less for more. But they can't do anything short of disconnecting me and that is unspeakable for a mobile operator.
I like this very much.
Re: US Court of Appeals: TOS may be updated by email, use can imply consent [pdf]
#123The issue is the consumer here doesn’t want to be forced into arbitration.
There is legislation proposed to end forced arbitration in consumer contracts like ToS.
https://hankjohnson.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/re...
Re: US Court of Appeals: TOS may be updated by email, use can imply consent [pdf]
#124JFC, BOYCOTT EVERYTHING!
Seriously, WTF? We know the leverage we all have but we refuse to use it because "convenience".
Re: US Court of Appeals: TOS may be updated by email, use can imply consent [pdf]
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless the user’s e-mail was controlled by their counter-party, what folder the message ended up in seems to be irrelevant to me. The user is the one who selected the e-mail inbox service provider, and has some degree of control over message categorization.
That does sound like there's an exploitable element there isn't it? Statistically speaking, most people use one of the biggest email providers, which use their own models to detect spam (or even quietly drop messages). If you're doing an unpopular TOS change, why not set the mail up to still be RFC compliant but in such a way where the mail isn't going to be allowed through by any of the providers. Then you can just…
Okay and if you did that only for that message your intent would be really easy to prove.
Re: US Court of Appeals: TOS may be updated by email, use can imply consent [pdf]
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The court seems to be completely disregarding that it was misdelivered into spam. Spam categorization isn't a delivery issue. The delivery is the same whether you, upon taking delivery, toss the message into a bin labeled "spam" or one labeled "inbox".
I guess it's an instance of a more general principle: sending an email doesn't guarantee it gets to the user's inbox, never mind that it gets read. Even if you are OK with the idea that a user can be presented updated TOS with no option to disagree (I don't, but put that aside for a moment), it should still require a mechanism that actually guarantees (or at least verifies) that the user has seen that the terms are u…
If registered mail is sufficient and that only requires proof of delivery/receipt, why would the same thing for email be insufficient?
Re: US Court of Appeals: TOS may be updated by email, use can imply consent [pdf]
#127The entire notion of being allowed to enforce arbitrary terms of service is absurd. There are probably a handful of terms everyone agrees are reasonable (no attempted hacking, rate limits, do not break laws) and everything else should be unenforceable. Especially garbage like what you're allowed to do with the stuff you get from the service even while not using the service , or about setting up competing products. It…
> It's like McDonald's selling you a burger and telling you how to eat it. and you are not allowed to criticize it or write about the size of it or how much meat there is in it or how filling it is to eat the burger. and you are definitely not allowed to compare it to burgers from other companies.
Not allowing to criticize is practically a law in some European countries
https://ppc.land/german-businesses-systematically-delete-cri...
Re: US Court of Appeals: TOS may be updated by email, use can imply consent [pdf]
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's like McDonald's selling you a burger and telling you how to eat it. and you are not allowed to criticize it or write about the size of it or how much meat there is in it or how filling it is to eat the burger. and you are definitely not allowed to compare it to burgers from other companies.
Not allowing to criticize is practically a law in some European countries https://ppc.land/german-businesses-systematically-delete-cri...
And the US with Oracle famously making it illegal to benchmark the performance of their database.
Re: US Court of Appeals: TOS may be updated by email, use can imply consent [pdf]
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks, outlook moved it to spam. Will auto delete it in 30 days.
TOS changes: Due to our contract with a Nigerian prince who is seeking to exfiltrate his family wealth, your last month's bill of $14.99 will be refunded in its entirety, and the fee schedule from now on will be as follows: [6 pages of legalese] $39.99 [3 more pages of legalese] You can opt out at any time by sending a notarized letter to our legal department at ___. Should you wish to continue using our service, we…
I had exactly this case with T-Mobile in my country. They'd sent me price increase but I didn't see it and realised only when got charged 3x more for internet I didn't use. Then I answered them with email that I resign, but they wrote that they need my signature and I need to send it by post office or go to one of their places
Re: US Court of Appeals: TOS may be updated by email, use can imply consent [pdf]
#130Can I do the reverse now as well? Email a company a unilateral change in the TOS? Or do TOS's have provisions against that as well? "I do not agree with your new TOS and will continue under your old TOS, and I will continue to use your service". And see when they will close your account down.
IMO, this would make a great court case.
I know I'd be listening intently if I were on the jury. I'm a "sauce good for the goose is good for the gander" kind of guy.