Comments on: Get off AOL’s back http://yardley.ca/2005/03/13/get-off-aols-back/ greg yardley on online product management Wed, 04 Jan 2012 05:04:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: zeno http://yardley.ca/2005/03/13/get-off-aols-back/comment-page-1/#comment-35 zeno Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:55:00 +0000 http://yardley.ca/merge/?p=32#comment-35 It may well be the case that this clause was introduced a year ago but pwople tend not to pay a great deal of attention when reading the T&Cs for things like AIM. Like <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4347325.stm" rel="nofollow">this guy says</a>, if we had similar clauses written into the contracts for anything else we buy or use we would be screaming blue murder. It just seemed to me like something a little beyond what was necessary. It may well be the case that this clause was introduced a year ago but pwople tend not to pay a great deal of attention when reading the T&Cs for things like AIM. Like this guy says, if we had similar clauses written into the contracts for anything else we buy or use we would be screaming blue murder.

It just seemed to me like something a little beyond what was necessary.

]]> By: House of the Hanged Man http://yardley.ca/2005/03/13/get-off-aols-back/comment-page-1/#comment-34 House of the Hanged Man Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:07:18 +0000 http://yardley.ca/merge/?p=32#comment-34 <strong>More on the AOL Terms of Service</strong> Andrew Weinstein has added his commentary to my post, and to Steve Rubel's post as well. Since it seems to be pretty much a copy / paste response I imagine he posted it elsewhere as well. Maybe the blogophere's reaction was over the top, and mayb... More on the AOL Terms of Service

Andrew Weinstein has added his commentary to my post, and to Steve Rubel’s post as well. Since it seems to be pretty much a copy / paste response I imagine he posted it elsewhere as well.

Maybe the blogophere’s reaction was over the top, and mayb…

]]> By: mobius http://yardley.ca/2005/03/13/get-off-aols-back/comment-page-1/#comment-33 mobius Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:38:16 +0000 http://yardley.ca/merge/?p=32#comment-33 there's only one service offered through AIM -- instant messaging. this statement: "In addition, by posting Content on an AIM Product, you grant AOL, its parent, affiliates, subsidiaries, assigns, agents and licensees the irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide right to reproduce, display, perform, distribute, adapt and promote this Content in any medium. You waive any right to privacy." is incompatible with ths statement: "AOL does not read your private online communications when you use any of the communication tools offered as AIM Products." one overrides the other. "we don't read your IMs. but if we did, we could take the content of those IMs and sell them to the highest bidder and you can't do a thing about it." and when the federal government wants to datamine these IMs? it would still be true, "AOL does not read your private online communications..." but big brother does. there’s only one service offered through AIM — instant messaging.

this statement:

“In addition, by posting Content on an AIM Product, you grant AOL, its parent, affiliates, subsidiaries, assigns, agents and licensees the irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide right to reproduce, display, perform, distribute, adapt and promote this Content in any medium. You waive any right to privacy.”

is incompatible with ths statement:

“AOL does not read your private online communications when you use any of the communication tools offered as AIM Products.”

one overrides the other.

“we don’t read your IMs. but if we did, we could take the content of those IMs and sell them to the highest bidder and you can’t do a thing about it.”

and when the federal government wants to datamine these IMs? it would still be true, “AOL does not read your private online communications…” but big brother does.

]]>