In article <69ggbhF336tu3U1@mid.individual.net>,
"_ Prof. Jonez _" wrote:
> Larry wrote:
> > In article
> > , MB
> > wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >> , Larry
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Have you even read the TOS of you newsserver and isp?
> >>>
> >>> I have never accessed information in excess of the authorization
> >>> granted to me by my ISP. Have you?
> >>
> >> How would you know unless you have completely read the terms of
> >> service to find out what actions are permissible? Plus I did not
> >> see in the indictment any reference to them trying to get personal
> >> information about the victim.
> >>
> >> Plus this hinges on one knowing what the TOS is, and EVERYONE just
> >> clicks a box acknowledging the TOS. The TOS should not be valid if
> >> you can just click a box to acknowledge knowledge.
> >
> > How is this different from saying that a written contract shouldn't be
> > valid if you can just go to the last page and sign it without reading
> > it?
> >
> > We can't force others to read or understand things. What we can do is
> > require objective, concrete actions that are manifestations of that
> > understanding. If someone willfully claims to have read or understand
> > something that they didn't read or don't understand, there's nothing
> > the law can (or should, IMHO) do to protect them.
> >
> > What does that mean? When you sign up for MySpace or an account
> > virtually anywhere, you have to click a box that usually says
> > something like "clicking here notes your acceptance of the TOS."
> > Some sites habev an extra layer of assurance by not letting you check
> > the box until you click the link to the TOS or scroll to the bottom
> > of the TOS or the like, but they can't force you to read it.
> >
> > If you check the box without reading the TOS, you're setting yourself
> > up for problems, since you don't even know what you're agreeing with.
> > Why should the law protect you in this situation?
>
> By replying to my posting, you, Lyin' Larry, contractually agree
> to the following terms and conditions:
>
> 1) You will eat one pound of human excrement while
> typing your response
> 2) You will do the above with a Chiquita bannana shoved
> up your ass.
>
> Failure to abide by these terms and conditions under the
> penalty of criminal felony prosecution.
>
> If you don't accept the above terms and conditions, then
> do not post a reply. Your reply shall be deemed an acceptance
> without modification or condition.
I'm writing this response without abiding by either of your terms and
conditions.
See if you can get the feds to prosecute me, fool. Or if you have a
cognizant case for breach of contract. |