Showing posts with label legal notice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label legal notice. Show all posts

Saturday, October 20, 2012

3647 Protect your rights

Saturday, October 20, 2012

Countering someone's negativity with your positivity doesn't work
because it's argumentative.
People don't like to be emotionally contradicted and if you try
to convince them that they shouldn't feel something,
they'll only feel it more stubbornly.
--  Peter Bregman --

-----------------------------------------------------------

Well, about a week ago I saw the first neighborhood house and yard decorated for Christmas, multicolored lights strung up all over everything.  I guess I can understand why they'd want to do it now, rather than wait for freezing temperatures and snow, but the distaste and sinking feeling I had upon seeing them surprised me.

I hate hate hate those gaudy displays. It ruins the whole Christmas thing for me.

--------------------------------

I've got a bunch of eBooks on my Kindle and a few more on the Nook.  I'll bet lots of people have huge music collections on iPods or whatever.  Did you know that if you die, you may not be able to leave those collections, unlike vinyl, CDs, DVDs, and real paper books, to your heirs?

You paid a small fortune for those collections, and it all goes poof when you are no longer around.

It appears that you don't legally own the bits and bytes you paid for.  Your account purchased the right to read, watch, or listen to them.  When you die, your account is terminated, and that terminates any right to the materials.  Story at http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-08-23/finance/33336852_1_digital-content-digital-files-apple-and-amazon.

----------------------------------

Something else to watch out for if you have a PayPal or an eBay account.  The user agreement says that if you have an argument with the companies, you abdicate all rights to sue them and can't join a class action suit.  You have to go to binding arbitration.

Now this is bad.
  • That leaves you out in the cold paying your own legal bills, going up against a corporation with an in-house legal department.
  • They might do the same nasty thing to hundreds of thousands of people, but very few will take it to arbitration.
  • This means that even if they lose every single one of those arbitration rulings (and arbitration rarely goes against the corporation, since the arbiters are not required to rule according to laws), it costs them relatively little, and therefore there's no incentive to change their practices.
Corporations LOVE arbitration!

Yeah, class action suits enrich the lawyers and rarely result in any real money for the damaged parties, and that's why people hate class action attorneys, BUT they DO make the offending companies change their practices.  It hurts them financially, but even more from bad publicity.  You can't do that all by yourself, and definitely not in arbitration.

Oddly enough, PayPal and eBay will allow you to opt out of that clause, but you must meet the deadline to do it.  You have to write each of them a letter in a particular format, to be received by early November for eBay, and the end of November for PayPal (exact dates are at the link).

Go to http://consumerist.com/2012/10/15/here-is-a-downloadable-template-for-opting-out-of-paypal-arbitration-clause/ for details.

Pass this around.

--------------------------------

Now, I'm a little confused, because when I took a class in commercial law about 16 years ago, it was pointed out to us that you cannot be forced to give up the right to sue.  Even if you sign a contract that specifies arbitration, you still have the absolute and irrevocable right to request redress from the courts.

Did something change?
.

Thursday, April 12, 2012

3514 Probable Cause

April 12, 2012

There are two kinds of people: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data,

------------------------------------------------

The probable cause document filed charging George Zimmerman has been released, at http://www.scribd.com/doc/89120165/Zimmerman-Probable-Cause-Document-2.

A profile of the judge who drew the case is at http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/04/12/meet-the-judge-who-drew-george-zimmermans-case/?mod=WSJBlog.
.

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

3319 I give up

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Garrison Keillor says he speaks Danish well enough to get into trouble,
but not well enough to get out of it.

---------------------------------------------------

This is longish, but do read it.
It may be important to you or someone you know.

I saw this notice when I went to Blogger today:
Do more with your photos
Your blog's photos have their
own album in Picasa Web Albums.
Take a look.
So I went to Picasa to look.

I was faced with the usual "gotta check the box that you read the Terms and Conditions". I've worked with lawyers long enough to know that you DO read the legal stuff or suffer the consequences, but Picasa didn't make it easy. The terms and conditions were in a small unexpandable box, and each paragraph was one very long line, so you had to scroll right and left forever, as well as down.

Most people would shrug, skip it, and check the box. I copied the damn thing to the notepad, and read it, because with that extreme format, I figure they're hiding something.

I found this little gem:
11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services. [Emphasis mine.]

11.2 You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.
That's the bit that got me banned from Facebook for life when I objected to Facebook's retaining my photos for their own use even after I had deleted them from my account. That word "irrevocable" means that once posting the photos, you can never regain control of them. Note, by the way, that paragraph 11.2 directly contradicts the last sentence of paragraph 11.1. That means that advertisers with relationships with Google can use your photos on ads offering, say, STD cures, and you have no say.

Sigh.

Oh, yeah, every photo that ever appeared on my blog is out there. I know that putting them on my blog I "gave" them to the internet, but I didn't give up my rights to control them if I so chose. I still retained the right to control --- until Google/Blogger/Picasa took it away.

I can't make the albums out there private. I did check the box to not give out the link, but I don't know what that means. Let me know if you suddenly can't see photos on entries. *I* can still see them, but I don't know if anyone else can. Please check out the immediately preceding post. Is the shirt dress still there?
.