Comments on: The Google Chrome terms of service are hilarious http://www.aquick.org/blog/2008/09/03/the-google-chrome-terms-of-service-are-hilarious/ entertaining hundreds of millions of eyeball atoms every day Sun, 12 Aug 2012 17:06:22 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: adam http://www.aquick.org/blog/2008/09/03/the-google-chrome-terms-of-service-are-hilarious/comment-page-1/#comment-951 adam Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:23:18 +0000 http://www.aquick.org/blog/?p=1231#comment-951 Yes, they "fixed" that, but there are still other things: <hr /> 5.5 Unless you have been specifically permitted to do so in a separate agreement with Google, you agree that you will not reproduce, duplicate, copy, sell, trade or resell the Services for any purpose ##### A separate agreement... like the actual license of the source code? 8.3 Google reserves the right (but shall have no obligation) to pre-screen, review, flag, filter, modify, refuse or remove any or all Content from any service. ##### So Google may block any site from being accessed with Chrome and retains the rights to modify pages as they see fit? 10.2 You may not (and you may not permit anyone else to) copy, modify, create a derivative work of, reverse engineer, decompile or otherwise attempt to extract the source code of the Software or any part thereof, unless this is expressly permitted or required by law, or unless you have been specifically told that you may do so by Google, in writing. ##### Again... this is an open source product. Why is this even in here? <hr /> And the terms for other Google services are similarly confusing with inappropriate language. It's not that I think that Google intends to do any of these things, but contracts, even non-negotiable EULAs, should be read in the worst case scenario. If you don't intend to enforce provisions in a contract, <b>take them out</b>. You know what's simple and easy on users? Legal documents that say what they mean instead of hiding behind inappropriate boilerplate language that may or may not apply. Yes, they “fixed” that, but there are still other things:

5.5 Unless you have been specifically permitted to do so in a separate agreement with Google, you agree that you will not reproduce, duplicate, copy, sell, trade or resell the Services for any purpose

##### A separate agreement… like the actual license of the source code?

8.3 Google reserves the right (but shall have no obligation) to pre-screen, review, flag, filter, modify, refuse or remove any or all Content from any service.

##### So Google may block any site from being accessed with Chrome and retains the rights to modify pages as they see fit?

10.2 You may not (and you may not permit anyone else to) copy, modify, create a derivative work of, reverse engineer, decompile or otherwise attempt to extract the source code of the Software or any part thereof, unless this is expressly permitted or required by law, or unless you have been specifically told that you may do so by Google, in writing.

##### Again… this is an open source product. Why is this even in here?

And the terms for other Google services are similarly confusing with inappropriate language.

It’s not that I think that Google intends to do any of these things, but contracts, even non-negotiable EULAs, should be read in the worst case scenario. If you don’t intend to enforce provisions in a contract, take them out. You know what’s simple and easy on users? Legal documents that say what they mean instead of hiding behind inappropriate boilerplate language that may or may not apply.

]]> By: James Grimmelmann http://www.aquick.org/blog/2008/09/03/the-google-chrome-terms-of-service-are-hilarious/comment-page-1/#comment-950 James Grimmelmann Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:59:32 +0000 http://www.aquick.org/blog/?p=1231#comment-950 The EULA (as of 18:00 EDT 2008-09-03) doesn't contain this license. The whole of Section 11 now reads, "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." Has Google yanked the offending terms, do you figure? The EULA (as of 18:00 EDT 2008-09-03) doesn’t contain this license. The whole of Section 11 now reads, “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.” Has Google yanked the offending terms, do you figure?

]]> By: Alan Hogan http://www.aquick.org/blog/2008/09/03/the-google-chrome-terms-of-service-are-hilarious/comment-page-1/#comment-949 Alan Hogan Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:29:31 +0000 http://www.aquick.org/blog/?p=1231#comment-949 Such a good blog post. Yes, it's hilariously bad. Good work pointing these things out! (If you haven’t seen it, check out Bruce Lawson’s post on Chrome: http://rurl.org/z1i) Such a good blog post. Yes, it’s hilariously bad. Good work pointing these things out! (If you haven’t seen it, check out Bruce Lawson’s post on Chrome: http://rurl.org/z1i)

]]>