Slashdot Mirror


AIM's New Terms Of Service

acaben writes "AOL has posted new terms of service for AIM, that include the right for AOL to use anything and everything you send through AIM in any way they see fit, without informing you. A sample passage: '...by posting Content on an AIM Product, you grant AOL, its parent, affiliates, subsidiaries, assigns, agents and licensees the irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide right to reproduce, display, perform, distribute, adapt and promote this Content in any medium. You waive any right to privacy.'"

22 of 689 comments (clear)

  1. I use Trillian... by tekiegreg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and any information I care about goes through their SecureIM service.

    So to AOL: I say this much, exploit fjkd;arjaiwor398u233209u''rju98e32 any way you want guys!

    --
    ...in bed
  2. I'm just guessing, by Duhavid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm just guessing, but I think they dont want customers. I'm not sending much thru AIM with those terms of Service.

    Also, what about users of GAIM, et al, that havent agreed to those terms? Can they enforce this there?

    --
    emt 377 emt 4
  3. All this means... by TheSpoom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...Is that any smart business will not send proprietary information through AIM.

    Of course, I say any smart business because I know some dumb ones will. Doesn't Microsoft have a similar policy with Hotmail?

    I also really doubt if this were ever tested in court that it would stand. This is evil, but about what I'd expect from AOL.

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
  4. Re:Fine, then by DoraLives · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I suppose if they want the rights to some irreversibly encrypted garbage, they can go right head.

    Absolutely. Go right ahead and plan on your average AOL user getting on board the clue train and encrypting their messages. Oh yeah. Really.

    --
    Is it fascism yet?
  5. Sheer volume by gotr00t · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Even though it looks pretty bad, just remember that the service is so popular that the chances any conversation would acutally be used in any meaningful way by a third party would be about as small as they are now.

    1. Re:Sheer volume by Deep+Fried+Geekboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're kidding, right?

      You can bet everything you own that AOL archive every message that's routed through their system. Their new TOS means that when Government Agency X comes a-knockin' demanding all the messages User Y posted in the last three years, they can simply turn over the records without having to go through all that annoying stuff of warrants, sub-poenas and so on.

      In fact, it doesn't even have to be Govt Agency X. It can be anyone. If they want to let them search the archive, they can.

      --

      I'm not wrong. You haven't thought about it hard enough.

  6. In Plain English by lax-goalie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "We retain the right to spy on you, profit from any good ideas you have, and tell your wife about your girlfriend."

    I'm just guessing, but I'll bet no one thought to run that last part past their management team...

  7. Re:In response... by mwilliamson · · Score: 5, Insightful
    gaim-encryption.sourceforge.net provides an easy-to-use wrapper for NSS. It's available for both *nix and win32 and works quite well. I like the fact they didn't try to re-implement the crypto, but rather use someone else's proper (and well reviewed) implementation.

    Folks, it is time to start putting your letters in an envelope. You can no longer trust the letter carrier to protect your privacy. Envelopes are cheap...so start using them.

  8. Re:Fine, then by Laivincolmo · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The problem is that while I might be willing to use encryption, some of my friends are not so comfortable with computers and technology. Some of them don't take the time to remove that aim.com window that pops up with the startup of the default AIM client. I somehow doubt that I could convince them to do something as complicating-sounding as encryption. Just my opinion though.

    Help a College Student

  9. Re:Fine, then by mwilliamson · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I think GAIM is a much better client than some piece of proprietary bloatware encumbered with crapware and a nasty eula.

    Do you really trust AOL to have choosen and CORRECTLY implemented a good crypto system? Do you trust they haven't backdoored it? Do you think any home-rolled cryptosystem (or even implementation of a solid design) can be trusted without peer review?

  10. Re:Oooh, I'm shocked! by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm pretty sure this is wrong. Everything goes through AOL's servers.

    And it couldn't possibly be any larger than the amount of data Echelon has to deal w/ regularly, my guess is they're doing this as a way of appeasing the govt. "Sure, we'll change our privacy policy, but please allow us to use your beefy data centers..."

    --
    [o]_O
  11. Re:Only affects those signing up after 5 Feb 2004 by Peyna · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Until they change it just enough so that you can't use it without updating it and are then bound by the new terms.

    --
    What?
  12. Put another way... by mark-t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How would people feel if their phone company came out with a new terms of service which said that anything which was spoken over a phone on one of their lines becomes the property of the phone company itself and may be reproduced, rebroadcast, that its users forfeit all rights to privacy, etc...?

  13. Re:Fine, then by Zorilla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's no surprise. Is that bug still there where AIM completely ignores the preference to not show that at login unless you click on junk in the AIM.com window at least once?

    At least their preferences are laid out in a sensible Netscape-style window with the categories on the left. The problem is that there's just too many damn useless features to configure, as well as the fact that the actual preferences menu item is buried deep within a pull-down menu titled "My AIM". What the fuck does that tell me as a category and what options are under it? With the narrow amount of space in the menu area, it would be much better off with an "Actions" menu for everyday functions and a "Tools" menu for all the extra wacky features that nobody uses.

    --

    It would be cool if it didn't suck.
  14. Re:illegal in my country by Xepherys2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Untrue...

    Companies that provide services over the internet must obey the laws of each country which their services may be used in. If a country has laws disallowing this, AOL may find itself (if pushed) in a situation of having to make many localized copies of AIM.

  15. Posts - not IM by cgenman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You encrypt your posts? How will people read them?

    I hate to sound like an AOL sympathizer, but the TOS specifically refers to "posts." Besides IM, AIM also provides message board services (or so I'm told by people who don't use Trillian, Gaim, or Psi).

    Does "posts" refer to regular IM usage? AOL implies not, referring to "message board posts, chat participation, and homepages."

    My reading of this is that AOL retains usage rights to everything you post on their static forums... forums which basically anyone can access. While I would feel better if this were not the case, that is a good bit better than AOL reading the I.M.'s you send to your co-workers.

    It sounds like CYA to me. As if AOL were giving themselves the right to decide to add access to the chat forums online or through AOL's proprietary service. It's the kind of CYA that inspired them to prohibit people from using AIM "while driving, operating hazardous equipment, or engaging in other forms of hazardous activities."

    On the other hand, go ahead and tell everyone on AIM about the TOS, without explaining that it's only posts. Then try to switch everyone over to Jabber. Please. The whole I.M. universe right now is about as convienient as sending E-mails from CompuServe to AOL in 1992.

  16. Re:New Terms in A Nutshell by berzerke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which is why I've always used strong encryption to IM my friends. If AOL wants to break my 4096-bit RSA key to sell my "lol"s, then they're welcome to...

    Hmmm...wonder how long before any encrypted messages are blocked? After all, it is THEIR servers the messages are going through, so they can filter.

  17. Amazingly calm response by joeykiller · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Guys, I'm amazed at how calmly you're discussing this issue! Most of you're discussing workarounds -- e.g. how to use gpg or secure-im to avoid being eavesdropped on.

    In my opinion the real issue is that the statement "You waive any right to privacy" may be the most evil statement in any EULA ever. Shouldn't these six words alone cause an outrage beyond belief here?

  18. Re:New Terms in A Nutshell by STrinity · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you use Freenet you can legally share anything. Why? Because nobody knows (or can ever know) what you're sharing and what you're downloading.

    So if you break a law and don't get caught, it's legal? Riiiiiiight.

    --
    Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
  19. get a grip... by drew · · Score: 3, Insightful

    so, out of some 200 comments rated 2 or higher as i write this (not counting one comment i made in the bottom of some thread somewhere) it seems that almost everyone here has missed the point....

    a) only 2 people have mentioned that these terms of service are over a year old.

    b) only 2 people have pointed out that these terms of service apply to posts on message boards and forums, which they reserve the right to replicate, duplicate, etc, and not to instant messages.

    c) no one has pointed out that the vast majority of the messages sent through aim are sent client to client, and never travel through aol's central server, so even if they did reserve the right to use your im's any way they saw fit, and they had the desire to, there's no way that they ever could.

    man, talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. one person yells "0 my g0d. teh AOL r stealing our pr1v4cy!1!!" and the whole army of slashdotters goes running for their tinfoil hats. get a grip people.

    --
    If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
  20. Re:New Terms in A Nutshell by STrinity · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you don't get caught, you don't get punished. Thus, the end result is that the same thing happens to a law-breaker that happens to a non-law-breaker (i.e. nothing). Therefore, effectively, a law was not violated.

    So what you're saying is that Jack the Ripper, effectively, never broke the law?

    --
    Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
  21. What TOS? by frobnoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The TOS reads:
    he following terms and conditions apply to all users who either registered for AIM services or downloaded AIM updates or software on or after February 5, 2004.

    Many posts here are talking about using third party encryption tools to circumvent this.

    This new TOS DOES NOT APPLY TO ME (nor to many of you). Why not?
    I didn't agree to their terms of service.
    I didn't sign up after 2/5/2004.
    I don't download AOL's AIM client. I use GAIM exclusively.

    AOL, use the messages I haven't give you rights to, I dare you.

    1. Send interesting messages
    2. Wait until AOL uses one somehow.
    3. Profit.