US court dumps on “browserwrap” T&Cs A Nevada court ruling against Zappos has reiterated what companies the world over should have worked out for themselves: “browserwrap” terms and conditions aren’t worth the paper they’re not written on. Zappos is being sued over a data breach which earlier this year exposed millions of customers’ names, e-mail addresses, phone …
...little boxes, full of ticky-tacky, like "click this box to indicate you agree with the 50-page 3-point Ts&Cs you just scrolled by and then you can start using our stuff that you paid for"
Now we know why those are there. "Affirmative action" take to say we agreed with the Ts&Cs.
Damn ticky-tackey.
But perhaps more important is seeing the "if you don't come by every month and re-read the whole contract and compare it clause by clause to the version you accepted then we deem you to accept and be bound by whatever changes we make any old time" racket explicitly thrown out.
Amazon, or Zappos? My mom buys shittons of shoes for her grandson from there... she gets 8 pairs, one pair fits, the rest go back... repeat every few months as the little bastard grows out of 'em. :)
So far it seems they do a good job on the customer service side, but having an agreement that says, "We can make this agreement whatever we want!" reminds me of elementary school rhetoric like, "I'm rubber, you're glue; anything you say bounces off me and sticks to you!"
All they had to do was ensure that the customers get advance notice and timely opportunity to exit while demanding no-sale no-transfer of their data. Too many companies think they can shuffle people's data around, and that is what exacerbates cases of password and email breaches, spamming, and other unfortunate events.
But, too many companies are assholic about it, and deny people clarity and opportunity to lock up or lock down their info. I know there is not "free ride", but companies have to come up with better business plans, better business models, and better continuity of business contingencies.
`` is required by the website user to agree to the terms of a contract....''
That means the ruling only holds in cases where they say you have to agree, but don't make you click something to signify that you do. If they force you to click a button that says you've read the Ts & Cs, they may still have a chance. But I love the ``illusory'' characterization---couldn't have said it better meself.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
