Top
Best
New

Posted by dryadin 14 hours ago

US Court of Appeals: TOS may be updated by email, use can imply consent [pdf](cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov)
484 points | 375 commentspage 8
hsbauauvhabzb 14 hours ago|
The email account I cannot access because google decided to ask me for a captcha for which I have no knowledge of, and the don’t have a human help desk that I can contact to prove ownership by providing ID documents?

Got it.

EarthAmbassador 13 hours ago||
Exactly.

I don't understand how a community such as this, as connected as it is, can't back channel a message to Google brass to do something about these lockouts, which occur frequently and are unnecessary. There is no way Google doesn't know about them.

Gmail is an essential piece of pervasive personal infrastructure, upon which hundreds of millions of people rely. People are losing irreplaceable data for lack of care on the part of Google. The cost of providing a way to prove identity while maintaining security ought to be part of the cost of doing business for Google as it provides Gmail.

Surely there are some Google employees lurking who can chime in on this frustrating neglect.

hsbauauvhabzb 12 hours ago||
The cost of adding a support desk outweighs any potential profit, I would imagine by a huge amount given accounts are ‘free’.

It’s not that the executive don’t know, it’s that they don’t care.

duskdozer 11 hours ago||
If they weren't making enough money from having people use their "free" accounts, they wouldn't offer them.
kotaKat 10 hours ago||
The jackasses at Ring provide a clickwrap forced EULA consent in their app update changelogs.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ringapp

They slip "By using this app, you agree to Ring’s Terms of Service (ring.com/terms). You can find Ring’s privacy notice at ring.com/privacy-notice." into their app update changenotes for every update.

michaelteter 14 hours ago||
US capitalism (aka, powerful financial entities driving policy).

To be fair, not all people in business or government prioritize "the all-mighty dollar" over everything else. Unfortunately, those who don't usually have principles; those who do often are willing to break rules. This is not an even match.

nozzlegear 13 hours ago|
It's just an appellate court ruling, not the summary execution of Bernie's last faithful warrior. It can't even set precedent since the opinions are unpublished.
apples_oranges 12 hours ago||
lol what a load of crap.. since when can a contract be changed by one side only without the other one signing it off?
dathinab 10 hours ago|
and sending a notification without any (reasonable) form of "has been read/noted confirmation"

email is notorious for arbitrarily not being delivered due to "spam/scam" filters misclassifying things

Noaidi 9 hours ago||
JFC, BOYCOTT EVERYTHING!

Seriously, WTF? We know the leverage we all have but we refuse to use it because "convenience".

graybeardhacker 5 hours ago||
Yet another example of this administration taking the side of companies over constituents. Now that the Consumer Protection Bureau has been dismantled, we can only expect more rulings like this.
tastybberries 13 hours ago||
In summary, the Ninth Circuit applied California law to determine that users received sufficient notice. Are other states' laws on notice similar enough to California law for this ruling to be applied broadly? I understand that the order is unpublished so the ruling has little precedential value regardless but I wonder whether the three-factor test is used in other states.
devcraft_ai 6 hours ago||
[dead]
riteshyadav02 13 hours ago||
[dead]
throw7384748r 12 hours ago|
[flagged]
PunchyHamster 12 hours ago||
Sir this is Wendy's
thaumasiotes 12 hours ago||
Dog owners are responsible for hospital bills.