6 ms·

Terms of Service; Didn't Read

219 points by vszakats 12y ago

Motto: "I have read and agree to the Terms" is the biggest lie on the web. We aim to fix that.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
Koldark 12y ago
This has been around for years already.
- ia 12y ago
  cool. how about a comment on its usefulness? code quality? breadth of TOS it has ratings for? "it's been around for years" doesn't add much value.
  - jychang 12y ago
    Website's user design is bad- opening "more details" in a new tab, for example, just redirects to the homepage. It's also not very filled out- major services like DuckDuckGo and Instagram just have stub pages. The problem with this website is that 99% of the users will never run into an issue with the TOS, and the 1% that do, will need a lawyer, not a TL;DR website. It's not very needed, nor does it do a good job at presenting the info it should.
    - jnbiche 12y ago
      You missed the (fairly obvious) point of the website, which is to advocate for better terms of service through public ratings and advocacy, not help people with individual legal issues. And the reason why opening "more details" isn't doing what you want it to is that it's not another web page, it's a modal dialogue -- ie, part of the current web page. You can argue (reasonably) that modals aren't good design, but it's definitely doing what it's intended to do. And what potential stub pages are you even talking about?
ifuck 12y ago
As a non-technical person from a completely different industry, my take on TOS is this: I don't care. Why would anyone care? Is it a legal binding contract between me and the comany? No. It might be taken into account if we go into court, but if they have it in their TOS that I bought an elephant from them - it will not hold. If they grant me any rights in their TOS - do I trust them? No. I would never keep data in the cloud without backups. Or have the assumption that my data will be held private. It's all just occupational therapy for lawyers.
- dctoedt 12y ago
  > Is it a legal binding contract between me and the comany? No. In the U.S., Web site terms of service / terms of use can indeed be a legal, binding contract: + If you click on "I agree" or something like it, then it's very likely to be binding, as more than one user has discovered to his chagrin. [1] + If you continue to use the Web site, and the site has a sufficiently-prominent notice that terms apply, then those terms are likely to be binding. [2] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickwrap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickwrap [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browse_wrap; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browse_wrap; see also the Ninth Circuit's extensive discussion and citation of cases in http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/08/18/12-56628.pdf http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/08/18/12...
  - captainmuon 12y ago
    I wonder if you can click on "I agree", and lie. Then you wouldn't be bound by the terms, because you didn't consent to them, but your wrongdoing would have been to access the service without permission. It's a bit like violating the GPL: If you modify a GPL program and distribute it without source, you violate the license between you and the person you obtained the program from. But one could also argue you "stole" the program in the first place and used it without license. In both cases I wonder which "crime" would have the lesser consequences.
    - dctoedt 12y ago
      > I wonder if you can click on "I agree", and lie. Then you wouldn't be bound by the terms, because you didn't consent to them .... It doesn't work that way --- courts look to objective manifestations of consent, not subjective intentions. In kids' terms: Crossing your fingers behind your back doesn't get you off the hook.
c0ur7n3y 12y ago
The irony is that they have to say this: "Nothing here should be considered legal advice. We express our opinion with no guarantee and we do not endorse any service in any way. Please refer to a qualified attorney for legal advice. Reading ToS;DR is in no way a replacement for reading the full terms to which you are bound." Even criticism of legalese requires legalese.
dethstar 12y ago
Not really ToS but Ello https://ello.co/wtf/post/privacy https://ello.co/wtf/post/privacy privacy page is kinda funny to read. On the Information Sharing section it says: Ello does not have any affiliated companies right now. But if we do in the future, we may share information with them, too. But I guess everyone on HN already knew it was nothing but publicity. edit: wrote trello instead of ello
rev_bird 12y ago
One of my favorite ToS items is from LinkedIn: You aren't allowed to "deep-link to our sites for any purpose, (i.e. creating or posting a link to a LinkedIn web page other than LinkedIn’s home page)".[1] The act of linking to a publicly available website is against that website's terms. [1]https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement
- snlacks 12y ago
  What if they find out that you just linked to a "deep-link?" Seriously though, is it made unenforceable when the usage by both parties (linkedin and users) actually encourage this? (Share this on facebook!) It sounds like a "catch-all" "don't like you" clause.
  - Zikes 12y ago
    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/07/weevs-case-flawed-beginning-end https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/07/weevs-case-flawed-begi... At least one person has been imprisoned for exactly that.
    - roghummal 12y ago
      But he was a hacker, not some commenter on hacke--er... hm.
  - chc 12y ago
    "Share this on Facebook" sounds like written approval for a link to me.
  - subb 12y ago
    My guess is it's to prevent "copycat" websites like those for stackoverflow.
    - chc 12y ago
      What does deep linking have to do with copying a site's content?
kristiandupont 12y ago
There is a lot of legal stuff that I don't understand but one thing in particular stands out: "Terms may be changed any time at their discretion, without notice to the user". Unless I am missing something, that basically says "we got your signature once, and we can now put it on whatever we like".
- jorgis 12y ago
  You could also read that as "just ignore this document. We didn't want it to stand up in court anyway."
danielweber 12y ago
I've heard proposals for standardized icons for TOSs. Kind of like the truth-in-lending statements with credit card offers that spell out everything up front.
dang 12y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5888393 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5888393
teachingaway 12y ago
Docracy had a great terms of service tracker - it diff'ed changes to TOS for a thousand companies. Looks like they shut it down last year though. https://www.docracy.com/tos/changes https://www.docracy.com/tos/changes
- hugoroy 12y ago
  Yes but it’s not open source. Ours is: https://tosback.org https://tosback.org -- https://github.com/tosdr/tosback2 https://github.com/tosdr/tosback2 and tosback3
wnevets 12y ago
Quite frankly most of the comments on that site are very subjective
- hugoroy 12y ago
  If there’s something you think is wrong, you can discuss and participate. Can you point specific examples which you think are "subjective"?
privong 12y ago
The browser add-on is nice – it adds an icon to the location bar with the overall site rating and makes the info readily accessible by clicking on that icon. It is nice to have a quick assessment of the site's TOS as soon right as the page loads.
corford 12y ago
I'm about to launch and I hate ToSs that consist of dense nonsensical boilerplate legalese. Is there anything out there (template or affordable service) to help a website owner construct a sane and simple ToS for their site/wepapp?
hugoroy 12y ago
Hello, hugo from tosdr.org here! Just wanted to point out that everything is on https://github.com/tosdr https://github.com/tosdr and there are easy stuff to work on to help us: https://github.com/tosdr/tosdr-build/labels/LowHangingFruit https://github.com/tosdr/tosdr-build/labels/LowHangingFruit Everything we make is Free Software (and open data) and we’re a not-for-profit. We recently put online: https://tosdr.org/submit-point.html https://tosdr.org/submit-point.html which is supposed to help increase contributions to the site so that we have more data and more relevant information. Please help us test, debug and contribute :-) One last thing, we’re also running https://tosback.org/ https://tosback.org/ -- all of this is a lot of work, and we definitely need more contributors :-) (opened another discussion about Tosback: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8396361 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8396361)
chuckcode 12y ago
Up vote, this seems like a great idea to me. I'd love to see companies get beat up publicly when terms of service are obviously bad. Would also love to see some standardization of privacy/content/other sub polices. If we're all supposed to push our data from an internet of things into the cloud the community needs to hold companies accountable as nobody else is going to. I shudder to think what facebook would be doing right now if it hadn't been for public outcry over things like their "Beacon" program.
darkstar999 12y ago
This inspired me to look for HN's ToS. As far as I can find, it is "When you click on a link, our server will send you the corresponding page." http://www.ycombinator.com/legal/ http://www.ycombinator.com/legal/ Really? That's it?
- DanBC 12y ago
  What more do you want? Licensing for the content of the post? ToS for webscraping? Privacy policy?
  - darkstar999 12y ago
    You are assuming that I find it unsatisfactory.
- tempestn 12y ago
  That's awesome. Also, we should clearly file a class action suit for breach of contract the next time HN goes down. Would be tough to show damages though. My productivity would probably go up.
jhallenworld 12y ago
The problem with click-on ToS is that they include heavy handed legalize designed to protect the service provider but for a casual service which is low cost or nearly free to you (they are monetizing you). You certainly would read it (or pay a lawyer to review it) if you were paying someone $100K for engineering work or something like that. It's not worth your time for something which is free. A rating service like this actually sounds like a very good idea- even one worth paying a small amount for (they very well will need money to protect themselves from lawsuits due to bad ratings). You pay the rating service about what you pay the web service- almost nothing. Anyway, how else can a class push back against ToS that are not worth reading?
el_duderino 12y ago
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/terms-of-service-didn’t-r/hjdoplcnndgiblooccencgcggcoihigg/ https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/terms-of-service-d...
mikelat 12y ago
I like this more for the fact that I get a better idea of what these companies are willing to say publicly about utilizing the data they have on you. TOSes are ultimately meaningless, but comparing sites with things like "your data remains yours" and "your data becomes ours" speaks a lot towards company policy.

219 points by vszakats 12y ago

Motto: "I have read and agree to the Terms" is the biggest lie on the web. We aim to fix that.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

Koldark 12y ago

This has been around for years already.

ia 12y ago
cool. how about a comment on its usefulness? code quality? breadth of TOS it has ratings for? "it's been around for years" doesn't add much value.
- jychang 12y ago
  Website's user design is bad- opening "more details" in a new tab, for example, just redirects to the homepage. It's also not very filled out- major services like DuckDuckGo and Instagram just have stub pages. The problem with this website is that 99% of the users will never run into an issue with the TOS, and the 1% that do, will need a lawyer, not a TL;DR website. It's not very needed, nor does it do a good job at presenting the info it should.
  - jnbiche 12y ago
    You missed the (fairly obvious) point of the website, which is to advocate for better terms of service through public ratings and advocacy, not help people with individual legal issues. And the reason why opening "more details" isn't doing what you want it to is that it's not another web page, it's a modal dialogue -- ie, part of the current web page. You can argue (reasonably) that modals aren't good design, but it's definitely doing what it's intended to do. And what potential stub pages are you even talking about?

ifuck 12y ago

As a non-technical person from a completely different industry, my take on TOS is this: I don't care. Why would anyone care? Is it a legal binding contract between me and the comany? No. It might be taken into account if we go into court, but if they have it in their TOS that I bought an elephant from them - it will not hold. If they grant me any rights in their TOS - do I trust them? No. I would never keep data in the cloud without backups. Or have the assumption that my data will be held private. It's all just occupational therapy for lawyers.

dctoedt 12y ago
> Is it a legal binding contract between me and the comany? No. In the U.S., Web site terms of service / terms of use can indeed be a legal, binding contract: + If you click on "I agree" or something like it, then it's very likely to be binding, as more than one user has discovered to his chagrin. [1] + If you continue to use the Web site, and the site has a sufficiently-prominent notice that terms apply, then those terms are likely to be binding. [2] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickwrap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickwrap [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browse_wrap; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browse_wrap; see also the Ninth Circuit's extensive discussion and citation of cases in http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/08/18/12-56628.pdf http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/08/18/12...
- captainmuon 12y ago
  I wonder if you can click on "I agree", and lie. Then you wouldn't be bound by the terms, because you didn't consent to them, but your wrongdoing would have been to access the service without permission. It's a bit like violating the GPL: If you modify a GPL program and distribute it without source, you violate the license between you and the person you obtained the program from. But one could also argue you "stole" the program in the first place and used it without license. In both cases I wonder which "crime" would have the lesser consequences.
  - dctoedt 12y ago
    > I wonder if you can click on "I agree", and lie. Then you wouldn't be bound by the terms, because you didn't consent to them .... It doesn't work that way --- courts look to objective manifestations of consent, not subjective intentions. In kids' terms: Crossing your fingers behind your back doesn't get you off the hook.

c0ur7n3y 12y ago

The irony is that they have to say this: "Nothing here should be considered legal advice. We express our opinion with no guarantee and we do not endorse any service in any way. Please refer to a qualified attorney for legal advice. Reading ToS;DR is in no way a replacement for reading the full terms to which you are bound." Even criticism of legalese requires legalese.

dethstar 12y ago

Not really ToS but Ello https://ello.co/wtf/post/privacy https://ello.co/wtf/post/privacy privacy page is kinda funny to read. On the Information Sharing section it says: Ello does not have any affiliated companies right now. But if we do in the future, we may share information with them, too. But I guess everyone on HN already knew it was nothing but publicity. edit: wrote trello instead of ello

rev_bird 12y ago

One of my favorite ToS items is from LinkedIn: You aren't allowed to "deep-link to our sites for any purpose, (i.e. creating or posting a link to a LinkedIn web page other than LinkedIn’s home page)".[1] The act of linking to a publicly available website is against that website's terms. [1]https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement

snlacks 12y ago
What if they find out that you just linked to a "deep-link?" Seriously though, is it made unenforceable when the usage by both parties (linkedin and users) actually encourage this? (Share this on facebook!) It sounds like a "catch-all" "don't like you" clause.
- Zikes 12y ago
  https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/07/weevs-case-flawed-beginning-end https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/07/weevs-case-flawed-begi... At least one person has been imprisoned for exactly that.
  - roghummal 12y ago
    But he was a hacker, not some commenter on hacke--er... hm.
- chc 12y ago
  "Share this on Facebook" sounds like written approval for a link to me.
- subb 12y ago
  My guess is it's to prevent "copycat" websites like those for stackoverflow.
  - chc 12y ago
    What does deep linking have to do with copying a site's content?

kristiandupont 12y ago

There is a lot of legal stuff that I don't understand but one thing in particular stands out: "Terms may be changed any time at their discretion, without notice to the user". Unless I am missing something, that basically says "we got your signature once, and we can now put it on whatever we like".

jorgis 12y ago
You could also read that as "just ignore this document. We didn't want it to stand up in court anyway."

danielweber 12y ago

I've heard proposals for standardized icons for TOSs. Kind of like the truth-in-lending statements with credit card offers that spell out everything up front.

dang 12y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5888393 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5888393

teachingaway 12y ago

Docracy had a great terms of service tracker - it diff'ed changes to TOS for a thousand companies. Looks like they shut it down last year though. https://www.docracy.com/tos/changes https://www.docracy.com/tos/changes

hugoroy 12y ago
Yes but it’s not open source. Ours is: https://tosback.org https://tosback.org -- https://github.com/tosdr/tosback2 https://github.com/tosdr/tosback2 and tosback3

wnevets 12y ago

Quite frankly most of the comments on that site are very subjective

hugoroy 12y ago
If there’s something you think is wrong, you can discuss and participate. Can you point specific examples which you think are "subjective"?

privong 12y ago

The browser add-on is nice – it adds an icon to the location bar with the overall site rating and makes the info readily accessible by clicking on that icon. It is nice to have a quick assessment of the site's TOS as soon right as the page loads.

corford 12y ago

I'm about to launch and I hate ToSs that consist of dense nonsensical boilerplate legalese. Is there anything out there (template or affordable service) to help a website owner construct a sane and simple ToS for their site/wepapp?

hugoroy 12y ago

Hello, hugo from tosdr.org here! Just wanted to point out that everything is on https://github.com/tosdr https://github.com/tosdr and there are easy stuff to work on to help us: https://github.com/tosdr/tosdr-build/labels/LowHangingFruit https://github.com/tosdr/tosdr-build/labels/LowHangingFruit Everything we make is Free Software (and open data) and we’re a not-for-profit. We recently put online: https://tosdr.org/submit-point.html https://tosdr.org/submit-point.html which is supposed to help increase contributions to the site so that we have more data and more relevant information. Please help us test, debug and contribute :-) One last thing, we’re also running https://tosback.org/ https://tosback.org/ -- all of this is a lot of work, and we definitely need more contributors :-) (opened another discussion about Tosback: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8396361 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8396361)

chuckcode 12y ago

Up vote, this seems like a great idea to me. I'd love to see companies get beat up publicly when terms of service are obviously bad. Would also love to see some standardization of privacy/content/other sub polices. If we're all supposed to push our data from an internet of things into the cloud the community needs to hold companies accountable as nobody else is going to. I shudder to think what facebook would be doing right now if it hadn't been for public outcry over things like their "Beacon" program.

darkstar999 12y ago

This inspired me to look for HN's ToS. As far as I can find, it is "When you click on a link, our server will send you the corresponding page." http://www.ycombinator.com/legal/ http://www.ycombinator.com/legal/ Really? That's it?

DanBC 12y ago
What more do you want? Licensing for the content of the post? ToS for webscraping? Privacy policy?
- darkstar999 12y ago
  You are assuming that I find it unsatisfactory.
tempestn 12y ago
That's awesome. Also, we should clearly file a class action suit for breach of contract the next time HN goes down. Would be tough to show damages though. My productivity would probably go up.

jhallenworld 12y ago

The problem with click-on ToS is that they include heavy handed legalize designed to protect the service provider but for a casual service which is low cost or nearly free to you (they are monetizing you). You certainly would read it (or pay a lawyer to review it) if you were paying someone $100K for engineering work or something like that. It's not worth your time for something which is free. A rating service like this actually sounds like a very good idea- even one worth paying a small amount for (they very well will need money to protect themselves from lawsuits due to bad ratings). You pay the rating service about what you pay the web service- almost nothing. Anyway, how else can a class push back against ToS that are not worth reading?

el_duderino 12y ago

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/terms-of-service-didn’t-r/hjdoplcnndgiblooccencgcggcoihigg/ https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/terms-of-service-d...

mikelat 12y ago

I like this more for the fact that I get a better idea of what these companies are willing to say publicly about utilizing the data they have on you. TOSes are ultimately meaningless, but comparing sites with things like "your data remains yours" and "your data becomes ours" speaks a lot towards company policy.