Posted on 10/27/2022 5:51:48 AM PDT by shadowlands1960
Two weeks ago Paypal introduced language into its terms and conditions that allowed them to withdraw $2500 from your account for each time they believed you “promot[ed] misinformation” or you sent, posted or published “messages, content, or materials that, in PayPal’s sole discretion, (a) are harmful, obscene, harassing, or objectionable.”
If they deemed you to promote messages they objected to 10 times, or to have spread misinformation (in their sole discretion) 10 times, they could take $25,000 from your account. If your PayPal balance was $0 they presumably could withdraw funds from your linked accounts.
After an online backlash they pulled the language from their update. They called it a mistake, but it was a very specific mistake not an errant comma or language that was placed into the wrong section of the terms.
Then they waited two weeks for the attention to die down. And now they’ve put the policy back into the terms. The Paypal t&c’s now specify a $2500 fine per instance of violating their acceptable use policy, including transactions which in their sole opinion promote intolerance. Intolerance isn’t defined, and could be considered anything Paypal says it is.
(Excerpt) Read more at viewfromthewing.com ...
“...whereas now it has to be connected to your actual use of paypal.”
If true, then that may be a bit different as associating the name PayPal with false claim (such as implying the 2020 election was legitimate) might imply that PayPal agrees with it.
It’s contained in the terms of service you agree to when you sign up.
PAYPAL isn’t the only payment service out there. I had an account years ago when I sold and bought stuff on ebay. I lost interest in ebay as a scam site when I bought something that was pictured and what I got was not what I bid on. Ebay was no help and I lost a lot of money in that transaction.
What gives a business authority to issue fines?
Your consent
Dig deeper, Pay Pal is most likely controlled by the CCP.
Is Paypal a city state in itself?
I don’t agree with this but it’s not really new. Professional sports teams have long fined athletes for violating the terms of their contracts.
They are employees.
"You may not use the PayPal service for activities that:....." “Involve the sending, posting, or publication of any messages, content, or materials that, in PayPal’s sole discretion, (a) are harmful ... or objectionable … (e) depict, promote, or incite hatred or discrimination of protected groups or of individuals or groups based on protected characteristics (e.g. ... religion, gender or gender identity, sexual orientation, etc.) … (g) .... promote misinformation … or (i) are otherwise unfit for publication.”
The update also stated,
"Violation of this Acceptable Use Policy constitutes a violation of the PayPal User Agreement and may subject you to damages, including liquidated damages of $2,500.00 U.S. dollars per violation..."[99] [100]
Obviously, since even posting what the Bible states regarding false gospels as well as illicit sexual unions and effects thereof can be subjectively judged in "PayPal’s sole discretion" as "harmful" or "objectionable" then this policy effectively can work to silence those whom PayPal autocratically judges to be politically objectionable.
And while PayPal later said that it will not fine $2500 users who engage in “misinformation” or “hatred” against protected identities," and that this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy, what PayPal removed is not fining people for misinformation, and it changed "activities that.... are harmful ... or objectionable … (e) depict, promote, or incite hatred or discrimination of protected groups or of individuals or groups based on protected characteristics, " into forbidding "the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory." Its Acceptable Use Policy now states,
Prohibited Activities You may not use the PayPal service for activities that:...relate to transactions involving... (f) the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory.
Yet in PayPal subjective "sole discretion, "the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory" can easily translate into what was previously ambiguously described as activities that:....." “Involve the sending, posting, or publication of any messages, content, or materials that, in PayPal’s sole discretion, (a) are harmful ... or objectionable … (e) depict, promote, or incite hatred or discrimination of protected groups or of individuals or groups based on protected characteristics (e.g. ... religion, gender or gender identity, sexual orientation, etc.) …
And as the PayPal User Agreement also states,
you must adhere to the terms of this Acceptable Use Policy. Violation of this Acceptable Use Policy constitutes a violation of the PayPal User Agreement and may subject you to damages, including liquidated damages of $2,500.00 U.S. dollars per violation, which may be debited directly from your PayPal account(s) as outlined in the User Agreement (see “Restricted Activities and Holds” section of the PayPal User Agreement).
And Restricted Activities and Holds” section of the PayPal User Agreement y states.
If you’ve violated our Acceptable Use Policy, then you’re also responsible for damages to PayPal caused by your violation of this policy..You acknowledge and agree that $2,500.00 U.S. dollars per violation of the Acceptable Use Policy is presently a reasonable minimum estimate of PayPal’s actual damages - including, but not limited to, internal administrative costs incurred by PayPal to monitor and track violations, damage to PayPal’s brand and reputation, and penalties imposed upon PayPal by its business partners resulting from a user’s violation - considering all currently existing circumstances, including the relationship of the sum to the range of harm to PayPal that reasonably could be anticipated because, due to the nature of the violations of the Acceptable Use Policy, actual damages would be impractical or extremely difficult to calculate. PayPal may deduct such damages directly from any existing balance in any PayPal account you control.
Moreover, the "Restricted Activities" in the above section includes providing,
"false, inaccurate or misleading information" as one of the violations which can result in disciplinary PayPal actions, "If we believe in our sole discretion that you have breached this agreement or violated the Acceptable Use Policy."
Thus it remains that it is quite possible for PayPal to engage in the degree of punitive censorship that resulted in an outcry and PayPal modifying its Acceptable Use Policy.
Thanks for the elucidation.
Tired to close my account but they said that I have a 3.00 refund coming to me which has not cleared their system yet, told them they can keep the 3 bucks, but well you know they can’t do that. Hopefully the money will clear their system tomorrow then the account will be closed.
A mistake is “hte” instead of “the” NOT an entire clause spelling out a $2500 “fine” for offending their woke overseers.
Apparently, PayPal, like all the other corporations run by Leftists, knows that they can survive just fine after they lose a percentage of customers that don’t accept their Leftist agendas. They’ll still have plenty of customers willing to be manipulated.
Hmm. Pro sports are intertwined with the government IIRC. Aren’t the commissioners approved through Congress? Also you have an employee/employer agreement there. I guess consumers are now going to have to form unions to collectively bargain these fines out?
Pro sports aren’t intertwined with government other than having the anti trust exemptions necessary to make a pro sports league possible.
Isn’t the imposition of these terms between PayPal and the user a contract of adhesion.
A contract of adhesion is where there is great disparity of bargaining power, and where the debtor receives nothing for the the imposition of this term.
Therefore, your consent to the waiver of rights may not be valid.
This appears to be the case here.
I agree. These are clearly adhesion contracts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.