SBC-Yahoo Partnership Cuts User Privacy

simeonbeta2 writes "The San Francisco Chronicle is running a story about Pac Bell's dsl partnership with Yahoo. Initially touted as a new service, Pac Bell is apparently now mailing existing dsl customers to urge them to install additional client software that will enable 'incredible new features and services'. While SBC's privacy policy is not excessively intrusive, use of the new software is covered by Yahoo's privacy policy, which is just a bit more Orwellian." The story's a little overblown - Yahoo's privacy policy reads that way because they offer financial services and the like, where they may well need financial information from you to provide the service. The reporter needed to investigate this new software DSL users are being asked to install, and find out what sort of user tracking it enables.

Comments

Just sign here, don't worry, we'd never enforce it

[dpbsmith]

In a novel by John D. MacDonald, a condominium buyer is told by the sales agent that the long fine-print contract he's signing is "a formality." Later, when the buyer discovers all sorts of problems with the condo and the agent is stonewalling him on getting them fixed, the agent says "After all, it says in the contract you signed that..."

The buyer protests "But you said that was just a formality." The agent says "That's right--it is a formal, binding legal contract enforceable in a court of law."

In real life, when it is honestly a negotiating situation, when I see things I really don't like in contracts I test them. "Can I strike this out?" "Can I write here, 'I have sixty-day return privileges and ask you to initial it?'" The results are very unpredictable. When the clause really IS just boilerplate that they don't actually plan to use, very often they will be perfectly agreeable, and you can get the verbal understanding down on paper. But occasionally, they'll freak out--that clause is in there for a reason and they've been ordered not to let anyone mess with it.

Unfortunately, none of this shrink-wrap and click-through stuff is a situation where you really have any power or any ability to negotiate. You can't strike out clauses and see if they'll agree to accept them.

Nevertheless, it's a very good idea to assume that contracts really do mean what they say and that all the fine print and boilerplate really might become operative someday.

Re:Just sign here, don't worry, we'd never enforce

[dillon_rinker]

it's a very good idea to assume that contracts really do mean what they say

This should be hammered into every person - there is no such thing as "boilerplate" in a contract. There is a REASON for EVERY SINGLE WORD (unless the attorney who prepared it is guilty of malpractice) It doesn't "become operative someday" - it is in force the second you agree to it. You may not understand the purpose of all the text in the contract, but the attorneys who prepared it do, and will enforce it if you arouse their ire.

Re:DirecTVDSL is out of business...

[dagg]

DirecTVDSL just went out of business. I have a feeling that'll be the next slashdot news story. Out of business.