Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Not Reading Terms of Service Can Have Devilish Consequences

A few years ago, two professors conducted a study with over 500 students to see if they would take the time to read the privacy policy(PP) and terms of service(TOS) agreement of a fictitious social networking site they created called NameDrop.

To no one’s surprise, almost everyone spent no more than a minute or so reading each policy and then clicked the accept button. In fact, 97% accepted the PP and 93% agreed to the TOS.

Buried in the TOS were two devilish provisions, however:

*MOUSE PRINT:

3.1.1 NameDrop Data […] Any and all data generated and/or collected by NameDrop, by any means, may be shared with third parties. For example, NameDrop may be required to share data with government agencies, including the U.S. National Security Agency, and other security agencies in the United States and abroad. NameDrop may also choose to share data with third parties involved in the development of data products designed to assess eligibility. This could impact eligibility in the following areas: employment, financial service (bank loans, insurance, etc.), university entrance, international travel, the criminal justice system, etc. Under no circumstances will NameDrop be liable for any eventual decision made as a result of NameDrop data sharing.

This one said that NameDrop may share all the user’s information with the National Security Agency, other agencies, third parties, and possible employers.

*MOUSE PRINT:

2.3.1 Payment types (child assignment clause): In addition to any monetary payment that the user may make to NameDrop, by agreeing to these Terms of Service, and in exchange for service, all users of this site agree to immediately assign their first-born child to NameDrop, Inc. If the user does not yet have children, this agreement will be enforceable until the year 2050. All individuals assigned to NameDrop automatically become the property of NameDrop, Inc. No exceptions.

This provision provided that applicants would assign their first born-child to NameDrop.

As it turned out, 98% of the students missed these gotcha clauses. And aren’t we all likely just as guilty?

Share this story:

 

ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Enterprise Charged Him $3,300 for Damage Done AFTER He Returned His Rental Car

It sounds like the definition of chutzpah. A fellow in Canada rented a truck from Enterprise for a few hours. He returned it after the location had closed, parking it in their lot, and put the keys in their lockbox for after-hour returns. A week later, he got a bill for $3,300 for damage that was done after he returned the truck.

How in the world could they charge the renter for subsequent damage?

*MOUSE PRINT:

rental damage

That’s right, tucked in the rental contract is an unexpected provision that the renter is responsible for any damage done to the vehicle until the vehicle is actually checked back in by an Enterprise employee.

But there is good news. After CBC started asking questions about this questionable practice, Enterprise relented and cancelled the consumer’s bill. But there is bad news: this provision is common to agreements of the major car rental companies. So do try to avoid returning any rental cars after hours.

Share this story:

 

ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Goli Gummies Dealt Bitter Pill on Claims

Recently the National Advertising Division (NAD) of Better Business Bureau National Programs came down hard on Goli Nutrition, the maker of those apple cider vinegar (ACV) gummies that are advertised on TV and on their website.

The product seemed like a sweet alternative for those who take several doses a day of traditional liquid ACV to control their acid reflux. Even diluted with water, drinking ACV is not pleasant.


Goli 3 times a day

Given the small dose recommended by the company, of particular concern were their broad claims like, “Finally a delicious way to get all the benefits of apple cider vinegar.”

*MOUSE PRINT:

In its decision…

NAD recommended that the advertiser discontinue or modify its advertising to avoid conveying the unsupported message that the amount of ACV contained in its gummies is associated with the health benefits of traditional liquid ACV.

Further, NAD found that the recommended dosage statement, “1 to 2 gummies 3x day,” in the context of its advertising conveyed the unsupported implied message that the recommended dosage provides the nutritional and health benefits associated with the recommended dose of traditional ACV and recommended it be discontinued.

During the proceeding before the NAD, Goli agreed to voluntarily discontinue the claim it made in several of the challenged advertisements that two Goli gummies were the equivalent of one dose of traditional apple cider vinegar. Nonetheless, it is appealing NAD’s decision. But that is not the end of the controversy for Goli. These and other issues are supposedly the subject of pending federal litigation.

Share this story:

 

ADV