arstechnica.com — Are you a company that is thinking of changing your terms of service agreement without notifying your users? The US Court of Appeals in the ninth circuit says that's a big no-no, even if the user originally agreed that they don't need to be informed.
Jul 30, 2007 View in Crawl 4
snakedal337Jul 30, 2007
clause 6 in relation to article 78 strictly states that in the event of an acceptance by an impaired literature failure (from here forth "unreadable") or by those those that deem the End User License Agreement (EULA) as defined by section 9 of text 8, too difficult to read, you are f**ked (from here forth "Owned").
midtownerJul 30, 2007
It's the 9th Circuit. If this is appealed, I think the odds are in favor of the SCOTUS granting certiorari and reversing.
midtownerJul 30, 2007
This is only binding withing hte 9th Circuit's jurisdiction. Further, I think there's a 9/10 chance that it gets overturned.
qoogirlJul 30, 2007
Does this apply to what Blockbuster recently did then, I wonder?I had no idea that my plan was completely taken out of existence with its 2 at-a-time, unlimited in-store exchange at $14.99. I was going to downgrade to 1 out, unlimited in-store exchanges, but now that'll cost me even more than what I pay now with tax. I had no idea and no notification by mail...:( Now I'll just stay on this plan I guess...
cyberoidxJul 31, 2007
EULA? Whats that? Are you sure its not a typo?