Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

AOL's Terms of Service Update for AIM Raises Eyebrows
eWeek ^ | March 12, 2005 | By Ryan Naraine

Posted on 03/12/2005 9:05:28 PM PST by holymoly

Edited on 03/12/2005 11:32:16 PM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]

America Online, Inc. has quietly updated the terms of service for its AIM instant messaging application, making several changes that is sure to raise the hackles of Internet privacy advocates.

The revamped terms of service, which apply only to users who downloaded the free AIM software on or after Feb. 5, 2004, gives AOL the right to "reproduce, display, perform, distribute, adapt and promote" all content distributed across the chat network by users.


(Excerpt) Read more at eweek.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aim; americaonline; aol; isp; privacy; service; terms; tos
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last
To: holymoly

There is probably no reason for AOL's continued existance. Local ISPs can do a better job for less money and without the jaring, screw the customer schemes of America On Line.

The latest flap with the instant messages highlights their lack of an ethical base in business practices. Its a lot like what happens when communists decide to run a business. In fact, the AOL representative who tried to talk me into keeping the service identified himself as "Scha" He then spelled it for me "Che". I asked him if this wasn't just like the name of the heroic Communist Freedom Fighter and he replied that he was named after him.

Aside from privacy AOL also lacks respect for tangible property. Some time ago, I found that $99 had been subtracted from my credit card. Aol informed me that I was now a member of AOL autovantage. The claim was that I had cashed an AOL check that gave them permission to raid my credit card. In fact, I had a firm policy of never opening envelops from AOL I reported this to the FTC and soon received a call from a local police detective. It seems that the sole response of FTC is to relay such reports to the police department of the victim and to the AOL local jurisdiction in Washington, DC.

The police detective told me that he spends a great part of his day chasing down AOL credit card fraud and getting refunds for the victims. He was relieved that I had secured my own refund and said he would move on to the next person on the list. AOL avoids criminal penalties by claiming that the credit card raids are the result of accidental billings.

AOL owes its current success to mass advertising and those little discs they drop in your mail box. Around here, they even leave stacks of AOL CD/ROMs in the post office. They make challenging pistol targets but otherwise, fail to satisfy,in that they do not shatter when hit.


21 posted on 03/14/2005 12:21:49 PM PST by mec1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
That's the rating I gave them about 10 years ago. This is just another outrage in a long list of outrages.

Did you ever hear the one about AOL stopping e-mail delivery of "The Federalist" because they criticized Ted Turner?

Oh yeah, it happened to some 27k - 32k AOL subscriber's......They never admitted it to those subscriber's either.

Nothing AOL does...should surprise.

22 posted on 03/14/2005 12:26:35 PM PST by Osage Orange (Long Feeder Cattle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: holymoly
Translated: "We have been reading our customers correspondence through AIM and our e-mail servers for years. We have seen some really good ideas we could have capitalized and now we can advantage of them."
23 posted on 03/14/2005 12:32:02 PM PST by IamConservative (To worry is to misuse your imagination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mec1

I hang them in the garden to scare away birds.


24 posted on 03/14/2005 12:37:34 PM PST by flada (My other tagline is a Mercedes Benz.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Hank Rearden

I never understood the need for "chat" software. What, is waiting 10 seconds for an e-mail message too slow?


25 posted on 03/14/2005 12:39:55 PM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido
I use chat mode in VOIP software to exchange text when we're not using voice. It can be handy to converse this way, without waiting for the delay involved when my email client has to poll the email servers.

As implemented in Skype when using broadband on both ends, there is essentially zero delay for voice and chat text, and the voice quality is far superior to a phone line. Plus, free is a hard-to-beat price!

All that being said, I avoid using anything associated with AOHell, including chat. My chat is confined to very limited, specific circumstances and my ID is unpublished; the last thing I want to do is get tied down in chat mode with anyone who happens to come along.

26 posted on 03/14/2005 1:05:38 PM PST by Hank Rearden (Never allow anyone who could only get a government job attempt to tell you how to run your life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Hank Rearden

Does that also exclude Yahoo and MSN messaging software? I don't use either one for business purposes, mainly because "MichiganStud" isn't really conducive to the contracts and corporate work I do.


27 posted on 03/14/2005 1:25:01 PM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: William Creel

"The Cone of Silence" (Maxwell Smart)


28 posted on 03/14/2005 1:31:43 PM PST by savedbygrace ("No Monday morning quarterback has ever led a team to victory" GW Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido
Does that also exclude Yahoo and MSN messaging software?

I don't understand the question.

29 posted on 03/14/2005 1:35:24 PM PST by Hank Rearden (Never allow anyone who could only get a government job attempt to tell you how to run your life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: holymoly

How does this effect someone using Apple's iChat?


30 posted on 03/14/2005 1:35:45 PM PST by MrLee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

Anyone still using AOL should get a real ISP.


31 posted on 03/14/2005 1:49:05 PM PST by rock58seg (The real enemy of good is perfect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: savedbygrace

33 posted on 03/14/2005 2:31:43 PM PST by raybbr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: William Creel
Someone needs to develop secure chatting so only the interested parties receive the message.

Shouldn't be too hard. The fundamental problem with a service like AOL's IM is that the IM server is involved all the way through the conversation. It doesn't really need to be that way, though.

Designed a different way, the IM server could simply be a rendezvous service, that allows users to register that they are on-line and to view which other users are on-line. From that point on, the individual client applications would be able to connect to other clients directly, bypassing the server entirely. The advantage from the server's point of view is that they are completely removed of the liability for archiving (and later being required to provide) content logs, because all they are doing is providing essentially a dynamic name service, not a chat service.

Once such an infrastructure were in place, it would be simple to allow clients to define different chat protocols (including encrypted chat) -- as long as the clients agree on what protocol to use, the applications can chat. The only requirement to use the IM network would be to support the server's protocol to advertise your presence and to view the presence of others on the network.

34 posted on 03/14/2005 2:42:03 PM PST by kevkrom (If people are free to do as they wish, they are almost certain not to do as Utopian planners wish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido
I never understood the need for "chat" software. What, is waiting 10 seconds for an e-mail message too slow?

While most emails arrive nearly instantaneously, I beleive the service time guarantee for email is on the order of 2-3 days. IM is more approrpriate for shoter, more interactive messaging.

35 posted on 03/14/2005 2:44:32 PM PST by kevkrom (If people are free to do as they wish, they are almost certain not to do as Utopian planners wish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: raybbr

Good find. I searched for 3 or 4 minutes and gave up.


36 posted on 03/14/2005 2:45:04 PM PST by savedbygrace ("No Monday morning quarterback has ever led a team to victory" GW Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Hank Rearden

I was just wondering aloud whether other free "chat" software programs, like MSN or Yahoo, posed similar privacy issues as AOL. I have accounts for each but it never occured to me to use either one to discuss business matters.


37 posted on 03/14/2005 2:50:17 PM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: OhioAttorney

While AOL claims the agreement does not include user-to-user communications, it sure seems to me that it could include user-to-user if AOL wished to do so.

A section of the controversial clause, which was first flagged by Weblogs and discussion forums, reads: "Although you or the owner of the Content retain ownership of all right, title and interest in Content that you post to any AIM Product, AOL owns all right, title and interest in any compilation, collective work or other derivative work created by AOL using or incorporating this Content.
Reference - http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1775743,00.asp

I am not comfortable with this agreement.


38 posted on 03/14/2005 4:24:01 PM PST by PhilSC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: flada
The sights really stand out against the blue and white boxes and discs.
39 posted on 03/19/2005 4:10:00 PM PST by mec1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson