Live data from Hacker News

No Terms. No Conditions

notermsnoconditions.com

141–149 of 149 posts

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#141
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is they can claim they didn't know.

Yes, and any functional legal system would then tell them that asking the subject directly and explicitly whether they're trying to use your bank for money laundering does not count as "taking measures". If you have actual measures (such as asking for source of funds and then asking for proof if the evidence looks incongruent with what was stated), you have no need for the silly question; if you don't, the silly ques…

Yeah, this makes sense, it is a bit of CYA theater.

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Having a clear clause to point to when terminating the account seems useful.

Banks can (and in fact are highly incentivized) to close your account if you're using it for criminal activity with or without you lying about it on some silly form.

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wonder what happens if you write "5th amendment" as the source for your completely legal salary.

They'll probably close your account and point to their right to choose who they do and don't do business with without having to explain themselves.

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Access is not conditioned on approval Legal training may be counterproductive to understanding this obviously non legal document. I understand that it simply means that 'the thing' is public, and everyone has access. As opposed to access being granted explicitly to individuals.

Well… in a court the people with legal training run the show. And keep in mind that you don't have to technically lose, in order to lose both money and time.

Oh I agree, I'm just saying that I understood what was meant

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#145
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/kyc-and-aml-beyond-th... > You might look at the standard KYC questionnaire for a new retail account and think “Really? You ask questions which have obviously correct answers. You give people less than a tweet worth of space to answer them. How could this possibly catch any criminals not stupid enough to write Occupation: Drug Dealer?” […] this is not the only mechanism by which…

I learned about this from The Wire. They called it "the headshot"

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#146
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what happens if you write "5th amendment" as the source for your completely legal salary.

They'll probably close your account and point to their right to choose who they do and don't do business with without having to explain themselves.

The IRS will close your IRS account?

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#147
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'll probably close your account and point to their right to choose who they do and don't do business with without having to explain themselves.

The IRS will close your IRS account?

This conversation is about banks, not the IRS, at least to my understanding.

Re: No Terms. No Conditions

#148

Remember when people started using WTFPL because it "sounded good", only to later find out it left them and their users legally liable? This is that but for websites.

Liable of what and to what?

Since no-one bothered to answer, the way the license was written did not disclaim any warranty. Sure, US jurisprudence might beg that there is no implied warranty, but most jurisdictions would interpret that as having unlimited warranty. In most places, what-you-pay is not the default to warranty claims, but instead focuses on what are the actual damages to the user. Notably, Australian/NZ and EU (especially Germany and Austria) has extremely strong consumer protection laws which also covers software, and WTFPL didn't even attempt to limit liabilities.

NB: For reference, here's the disclaimer for several popular licenses:

MIT:

  THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
GPLv3:

  15. Disclaimer of Warranty.

  THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM “AS IS” WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.

  16. Limitation of Liability.

  IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MODIFIES AND/OR CONVEYS THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

  17. Interpretation of Sections 15 and 16.

  If the disclaimer of warranty and limitation of liability provided above cannot be given local legal effect according to their terms, reviewing courts shall apply local law that most closely approximates an absolute waiver of all civil liability in connection with the Program, unless a warranty or assumption of liability accompanies a copy of the Program in return for a fee.
CC0 (just to drive the point home):

  4. Limitations and Disclaimers.

  (Subsection a (which focused on trademarks and patents) omitted for brevity.)

  b. Affirmer offers the Work as-is and makes no representations or warranties of any kind concerning the Work, express, implied, statutory or otherwise, including without limitation warranties of title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, non infringement, or the absence of latent or other defects, accuracy, or the present or absence of errors, whether or not discoverable, all to the greatest extent permissible under applicable law.
Post reply on HN