Re: DO READ Quickie Privacy Analysis of Google's New "Chrome" Web Browser

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Victor Marks" <victormarks () gmail com>
Date: September 4, 2008 10:38:02 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Re: DO READ Quickie Privacy Analysis of Google's New  
"Chrome" Web Browser

Dave, friends,

Google has updated the TOS.

http://tapthehive.s483.sureserver.com/chrome.html

"UPDATE: At about 4:00PM EST, I've received the following note:
Here's an official response from Rebecca Ward, Senior Product Counsel
for Google Chrome:

"In order to keep things simple for our users, we try to use the same
set of legal terms (our Universal Terms of Service) for many of our
products. Sometimes, as in the case of Google Chrome, this means that
the legal terms for a specific product may include terms that don't
apply well to the use of that product. We are working quickly to
remove language from Section 11 of the current Google Chrome terms of
service. This change will apply retroactively to all users who have
downloaded Google Chrome.""

and the new terms:

11. Content license from you

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.

12. Software updates ...


Regards,
Victor Marks

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:12 AM, David Farber <dave () farber net> wrote:
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin () law miami edu 
> >
> Date: September 4, 2008 8:56:31 AM EDT
> To: David Farber <dave () farber net>
> Cc: ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
> Subject: Re: [IP] DO READ Quickie Privacy Analysis of Google's New  
> "Chrome"
> Web Browser
> Reply-To: froomkin () law tm
>
> [for IP if you wish]
>
> Westlaw attempted to impose a similar term, claiming an unconditional
> non-exclusive license for itself, on academic users of its  
> BLACKBOARD law
> school classroom software for at least the first year of the roll- 
> out --
> which is on reason why I never used it (it's also closed-source...).
>
> We believe this stuff because WE'VE SEEN IT DONE
>
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2008, David Farber wrote:
>
> > Maybe because we have been conditioned to believe that corporations  
> > are
> > not to be trusted and will behave OLNY when they are watched and  
> > their
> > issues aired  djf
> >
> >
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
> > Date: September 3, 2008 6:05:48 PM EDT
> > To: dave () farber net
> > Cc: lauren () vortex com
> > Subject: Re: [IP] Re: DO READ Quickie Privacy Analysis of Google's  
> > New
> > "Chrome" Web Browser
> >
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > I am increasingly impressed and depressed by some people's
> > willingness to believe the worst even when the accusations are
> > obviously illogical.
>
> --
> http://www.icannwatch.org   Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net
> A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin () law tm
> U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
> +1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
>                     -->It's warm here.<--
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com