74

Unauthorized access to a computer is a crime in most parts of the world However, Microsoft's access is not unauthorized (my emphasis): Updates. The softwareperiodically [sic] checks for system and app updates, and downloads and installs them for you. You may obtain updates only from Microsoft or authorized sources, and Microsoft may need to update your ...


14

It would be terribly risky for you to simply link another company's terms of service. What if they take their server down? What if they change their terms? You would not even know when exactly the changes were made. Copying their terms means you might run into copyright issues on the text. Either pay a lawyer to write your ToS for you, or see if you can ...


12

You really asked two different questions, so let's take them one at a time: Publisher Within the scope of 47 USC 230, Stack Exchange is defined as a provider of an "interactive computer service," which is defined as follows: Interactive computer service The term “interactive computer service” means any information service, system, or access ...


10

Yes, you can. An excellent example is this very website - at the bottom of this page you will find a series of links in the footer, one of which is "Terms of Service". I think you will agree that most people using the Law SE are making no money from it or paying no money to use it and yet the terms of service sets out in black and white what a user ...


5

No When I go into my grocery store, I can use the lettuce if I pay for it. The grocer does not explicitly state that I can't use the lettuce if I don't pay for it but that doesn't mean I can. Replace "lettuce" with "software" (or any other property you don't own) and you have the same situation.


5

is this absolutely required to be considered a valid document in most jurisdictions, most notably, the European Union? Not at all. There is no legal requirement that contracts, terms of service, and so forth be drafted, devised, or even validated by a lawyer. Law requires that certain types of contract be notarized. That refers to the moment where the ...


5

YES There are many services that are offered for free but bound to specific terms. For example Twitter tells you to obey the acceptable use guidelines and the stack has rules on what conduct is allowed. The ToS are the main thing how they ensure that the user has been informed of what they can do, and what you can do. They are a simple contract of adherence: ...


4

This follows from a term in your agreement: in opening the account, you agreed to a binding arbitration clause. The general reason why they can do this is because it is not prohibited by law to have such clauses in agreements (in fact, the Federal Arbitration Act protects such clauses from legal challenge). For the same reasons, the clauses can impose ...


4

Yes They explicitly make the identified illegal act a breach of contract and allow you to sue. Without that, you may have no remedy.


4

One way in which it holds legal water is that if you use the website in violation of the terms, then you may forfeit your right to take civil action against the company. Analogous language especially regarding the age of the user may protect the site against actions by third party governmental entities (COPPA-like laws), though nothing patently obvious ...


4

In general, yes, though there may be a jurisdiction-specific limit. The basic principle is that the website owner offers something of value in exchange for something else of value: Netflix offers content in exchange for money. What is crucial is that the user must have agreed to make a payment, and the website owner has the obligation to establish that the ...


3

Binding arbitration’s legal It is almost certain that the letter is simply restating the dispute resolution terms in the contract that you agreed to when you opened the account. If it isn't in the original agreement then they are proposing a change - you can either agree to this change or, as the letter suggests opt-out of the change. Or you can close your ...


3

Assuming Chegg own the copyright, then they can restrict the activities that copyright protects The statement you quote is no more or less than the rights granted to them by copyright law. Basically, it's their stuff, they get to decide how you can use it. However, that does not necessarily mean that the uses that you have nominated are prohibited. For that, ...


3

Yes. They can do anything they want and you have no recourse. You will lose any appeal you make under the TOS because it says: "VRChat may in its sole discretion terminate your user account on the Service or suspend or terminate your access to the Service at any time for any reason or no reason, with or without notice." This is not an unreasonable ...


3

Can a moderation team in a game extend a ban that you have just because they want to TL;DR Yes and no. It's their platform and you broke the rules that you agreed to. Therefore, you forfeited your right to use the service for as long as they deem appropriate up to and including forever. In exercising this power they must act reasonably which, in the absence ...


3

You mean like this? Of course, a website can charge you to access its pages; many do. And yes, clicking on an "I agree" button can form a valid contract (just visiting the website can't). Historically, the law has adopted the position that if you sign it (including by clicking "I agree") you read it, you understood it and you agreed to it. It's hard to ...


3

Can you have valid Terms and Condictions when there is no entity mentioned? No, but the example you post is inapplicable because the terms clearly state in the beginning that the agreement is between "you" and "Binance operators". The latter is defined shortly thereafter. Thus, it certainly identifies the entity. A contract does not need ...


3

Profit changes everything. There is a tradition of tolerance (mostly) for "fan projects" which are totally not-for-profit. However that goes out the window very quickly once profit enters the picture (if the original publisher is excluded that is; Black Mesa had a happy integration of publisher and fan profit, since they also run the game ...


3

This is the earliest dispute resolution clause I can find for Patreon. Some points to note: It calls up (as do all subsequent revisions) JAMS Streamlined Arbitration Rules & Procedures, These allow the consolidation of arbitration’s between different parties over the same issue, Patreon’s liability is limited to the amount collected from the particular ...


3

It’s impossible to say There are several hundred (at least) jurisdictions in the world. There are 28 nations in the EU (shortly to be 27) and many of them have sub-national jurisdictions (the UK has 3). Most of these have restrictions on the “practice of law” and each of those defines “practicing law” differently. In some (e.g. australia) the drafting of ...


3

You are probably an employee Answer these questions: Can you say “no” when the University offers you work? Or vice-versa, can they say “no” when you want to work? Can you subcontract the work? That is, can you hire someone to do what the University hired you to do? Do you control how and when you work? For example, when you break University rules are you ...


3

This is just saying that if they can’t host your event then the only remedy you get is your money back that your paid them (your deposit, advance payments, and of course your don’t owe final payments). It is there to make it clear that they are not responsible of any other money. What else might the client want them to refund? Other lost expenses. Non ...


3

First of all, Google's TOS says we reasonably believe that your conduct causes harm or liability to a user, third party, or Google — for example, by hacking, phishing, harassing, spamming, misleading others, or scraping content that doesn’t belong to you And you ask: But suppose a researcher, say based in UK, managed to work around them, get a big amount ...


3

No that's definitely not a good idea. A privacy policy/terms document is supposed to reflect your situation: local laws for both PP/Terms describe exactly what your company does for both PP/Terms and identify you as a company What you will do however, is to describe the service providers you're using, in that case you would link to them, from your own ...


2

Terms of service are contracts, where you grant a person a right in exchange for them doing something. If they have agreed but violate the terms, you may have legal recourse to sue them; or you can "undo" their action, e.g. you can delete porn that they uploaded. There are certain limitations on your recourse, for example you cannot fine a user $...


2

Since your question is about more than just replicating the server functionality, I will address the detail that is unrelated to producing a working copy of the server. Even if you do manage to legally create a working server, if you don't license the right to operate, then such operation of the server would constitute a tortious interference in the ...


2

The only way to be entirely sure not to get into trouble is to get yourself a lawyer and ask them about the local laws in more detail. In general, your EULA might bar you from dissecting or altering the program or trying to obtain the server code and it might remove your license to use the software if you do so, though enforceability of those provisions is a ...


2

Leaving the EU will not affect these Terms unless WhatsApp update them "European Region" is a definition they've invented. It has no legal meaning in relation to the European Union or our status therein. They define "European Region" as: Andorra, Austria, Azores, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canary Islands, Channel Islands, Croatia, Czech Republic,...


2

The first hurdle that you have to clear is determining that online betting is legal at all. I can't bet online under state law, but other states allow it. If online betting is generally legal for you, you still may have to clear statutory hurdles regarding betting for another person, so again you have jurisdictional questions that arise (both where you are ...


2

Probably not There have not been many cases in this area of the law, and those have mostly dealt with "deep linking", particularly cases where a person knowingly linked to a page bypassing a login or introductory page, when the site was so designed that ordinarily a visitor could only get to other pages by going through such a log-in or intro page. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible