Criticism and lawsuits Terms of service




1 criticism , lawsuits

1.1 aol
1.2 sony
1.3 instagram
1.4 zappos





criticism , lawsuits
aol

in 1994, washington times reported america online (aol) selling detailed personal information subscribers direct marketers, without notifying or asking subscribers; article led revision of aol s terms of service 3 years later.


on july 1, 1997, aol posted revised terms service take effect july 31, 1997, without formally notifying users of changes made, notably new policy grant third-party business partners, including marketing firm, access members telephone numbers. several days before changes take effect, aol member informed media of changes , following news coverage incited large influx of internet traffic on aol page enabled users opt out of having names , numbers on marketing lists.


sony

in 2011 george hotz , others sued sony corporation. sony claimed violating terms of service of playstation network, hotz , others committing breach of contract.


instagram

on december 17, 2012, instagram announced change terms of use caused widespread outcry user base. controversial clause stated: agree business or other entity may pay display username, likeness, photos (along associated metadata), and/or actions take, in connection paid or sponsored content or promotions, without compensation .


there no apparent option opt out of changed terms of use. move garnered severe criticism privacy advocates consumers. after 1 day, instagram apologized saying remove controversial language terms of use. kevin systrom, co-founder of instagram, responded controversy, stating,



our intention in updating terms communicate we’d experiment innovative advertising feels appropriate on instagram. instead interpreted many going sell photos others without compensation. not true , our mistake language confusing. clear: not our intention sell photos. working on updated language in terms make sure clear.



zappos

some terms of service worded allow unilateral amendment, 1 party can change agreement @ time without other party s consent. 2012 court case in re zappos.com, inc., customer data security breach litigation held zappos.com s terms of use, 1 such clause, unenforceable.








Comments

Popular posts from this blog

1940-1941 Pontiac Torpedo

1920–1923 List of 1920s jazz standards

Sovereign Building Zollinger-Harned Company Building