The 5 Most Laughable Terms of Service On the Net

nicholas.m.carlson writes "According to these five terms of service and EULA, Google owns any content you create using its Chrome browser and can filter your Gmail messages if it likes. Facebook says it can sell its users' uploaded images as stock photography. YouTube can keep footage of your kids forever, even after you've deleted it from the site. And AOL can ban you for using vulgar language on AIM. Funny, right? That's why Valleywag calls them 'The 5 most laughable terms of service on the Net.'" Reader dlaudel writes, regarding the previously-mentioned Google EULA for Chrome, "According to Ars Technica, Google's EULA for Chrome was just copy-and-pasted from its EULA for other services, a practice that is apparently common at Google."

Verizon DSL

I skimmed the terms of use when I started my Verizon DSL account several years ago, and I'm quite certain it said something about downloading pornography being prohibited. Um, yeah, sure -- click "agree" to continue...

while funny,

what happens if these companies decide to try enforcing the EULAs?

Re:while funny,

It loses in court and EULAs die and the world becomes a happier place.

Re:while funny,

Such an optimist! May I have your autograph? I don't see people like you very often.

More realistically, they try and the consumer has no clue about their rights and they succeed. But even more likely, they never do anything.

Re:while funny,

EULA's are really more for protecting them from liability than they are for trying to steal our junk.

I mean, vis a vis the Facebook thing, there are vast quantities of precedent regarding copyright and liability which make it a bit unlikely that they could actually follow through on some mass appropriation of content...Just as an example, say I'm a professional photographer and someone else puts one of my images on Facebook...does that mean that they own all the rights to my photo? Seriously unlikely; those laws have wicked teeth, and there are very specific things that have to occur for you to transfer rights to your own copyrights to a third party.

Re:while funny,

Another fun part, copyright is a strict liability issue. That means that no matter how well Facebook thought they had permission you can sue them anyway for up to $30000/work (as opposed to the 150000$/work for willful infringement RIAA/MPAA wants). That's one of the reasons you go with a stock photo agency - they usually offer some indemnity that their pictures really are cleared to use. Oh yeah and apart from that, there's the model release so unless it's only you in the picture they have to get that too.

Re:while funny,

No designer in their right mind would use even an nth of the shit uploaded on Facebook everyday.

No problem...

I always make it a point to alter the EULA to my terms. Really, if a forced, non-negotiated contract can be valid, I've got them by the balls.

A simple yellow Post-It note with my terms stuck to the screen allows me to click "OK" to the presented terms.

I'm not sure how I'm going to get Google to send me all of their 2008 profits in exchange for testing their browser, though.

laughable?

Not really. The google one's funny, although wikis which were made with a predominantly chrome-using user base might have a problem with it. The facebook one is blatantly taking a right that it doesn't have a legitimate reason to take.

AIM probably has that in case someone goes crazy swearing at some kids and a bunch of soccer moms get angry, and the youtube one is probably some CYA, since services like that can often store copies that are hard if not impossible to find.

Overall, the terms of service (like most ToS's) are overkill and not something that people would agree to if they actually read it. The problem is that they put them in legalese, which might as well be japanese for most people.

Re:laughable?

The facebook one is blatantly taking a right that it doesn't have a legitimate reason to take.

From their EULA:

"By accessing or using our web site at www.facebook.com or the mobile version thereof (together the "Site") or by posting a Share Button on your site, you (the "User") signify that you have read, understand and agree to be bound by these Terms of Use ("Terms of Use" or "Agreement"), whether or not you are a registered member of Facebook."

My emphasis.

Re:laughable?

So how do I read the Terms of Use?

Go to facebook.com? If I do that, I've already agreed to it!

Re:laughable?

or by posting a Slave Button on your site, you (the "User")

Let me suggest a slight change: by posting a Slave Button on your site, you (the "Leather-hooded Gimp")...

They're supposedly changing the Chrome EULA

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-chrome-license-agreement/ [mattcutts.com]

In order to keep things simple for our users, we try to use the same set of legal terms (our Universal Terms of Service) for many of our products. Sometimes, as in the case of Google Chrome, this means that the legal terms for a specific product may include terms that donâ(TM)t apply well to the use of that product. We are working quickly to remove language from Section 11 of the current Google Chrome terms of service. This change will apply retroactively to all users who have downloaded Google Chrome.

Rebecca Ward, Senior Product Counsel for Google Chrome

What's Funny One Day...

...is scary the next.

Granted, most people ignore the EULAs. But, what happens if the EULAs can actually be enforced?

Not ownership

The Google EULA states that you grant them a non-exclusive right to store and reproduce your stuffs where necessary for the use of Google's services, which is a necessity because otherwise they'd be infringing on your IP rights by storing your files and serving them up to you. You retain copyright, ownership, blah de blah, as stated at the top of that part of the EULA. For Chrome, it's already been revised to only include the "you retain your rights" clause.

Licensing

Heh heh... Just the other day an acquaintance was telling me that his company won't use open source software because the GPL is "too restrictive" (huh?). So I suggested that he actually read the EULAs for the software they do use there. He just mutters something about communism and the conversation is over!

Oh the 5 most...?

Tomorrow we'll see the 10 fastest ... and then the 20 worst ... and then the 100 funniest ...

And on the day I read a headline like "the 50 hottest nerds" on the frontpage, I'll digg that story. (and promote it on every other page I can find too).

Slashdot will need it, by then. Sigh..

Google Lawyer must be a plush job

Copy-paste copy-paste copy-paste

EULA for Open Source?

"According to Ars Technica, Google's EULA for Chrome was just copy-and-pasted from its EULA for other services, a practice that is apparently common at Google."

Why the hell do they think they need an "EULA" or "TOS" for a supposedly Open Source program at all? Doesn't Google run these things pas their lawyers? Or do they and this is the result?

Notable Omission

I personally have always got a kick out of this particular clause from the iTunes EULA:

You also agree that you will not use these products for any purposes prohibited by United States law, including, without limitation, the development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons.

Re:funny?

the DMCA is laughable too, and we're not laughing

We are. HAR HAR HAR!
Sincerely yours,
the R.I.A.A.

Re:Indeed.

Lol 3rd Pots! err opst ...stop Fuck it.

Content created with Google Chrome. By reading this post you acknowledge and agree that Google (or Google's licensors) own all legal right, title and interest in and to the post, including any intellectual property rights which subsist in the post (whether those rights happen to be registered or not, and wherever in the world those rights may exist). You further acknowledge that the post may contain information which is designated confidential by Google and that you shall not disclose such information without Google's prior written consent.

Re:the most amicable terms of service in the unive

WARNING: the above link leads to a nasty GNAA page, and it's the same one you all have seen, so don't click it out of curiosity.

Would you wizz on an electric fence?

Re:the most amicable terms of service in the unive

Would you wizz on an electric fence?

It hurts :(

Re:Something tells me YouTube is not to blame

This is why anonymity is so important on the internets. If you hold a magnifying glass up to anyone's life you are bound to find something objectionable if you look hard enough. So, multiple identities and anonymity is the only way to remain safe online.