Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Fannie Maes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
198
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 04:33:00 -
[211] - Quote
Henry Haphorn wrote:Fannie Maes wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Ares Renton wrote:Actually, I always click decline, so I'm not bound by that. I don't really want to get into the discussion, but playing the game after bypassing or declining the EULA would be illegal, or implies acceptance... ... so trying to sue CCP for breaching your privacy would be the stupidest of all dumbarse ideas Also Fannie I think part of the EULA is that any dispute has to be in a court in Iceland A) it is not illegal, but pointless perhaps CCP would object and deny that person service but they would lose a complaint for reimbursement. B) Not true at all, if they lose a dispute and break law in a country where they offer service in let's say the UK then they can enjoy being denied to conduct business in all of EU even. Same goes for the US, you can file a suit in any state there, it would hurt Business operating there. edit; in any case this whole thread is stupid and pointless, OP is wrong and the ones arguing that EULA and TOS is a binding contract are also wrong, peace. PS: Your business class is wrong! Please cite the case or I will ignore everything you said up until now and from now on.
Nope, I wont, I welcome you to ignore me forever because I enjoy watching dumb business students graduate and if lucky work as my bank teller looking jelly when they see my bank account. |
Ferria
Among the Shadows Ex umbra.
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 05:43:00 -
[212] - Quote
You do understand that there are no international privacy laws, so CCP would only need to comply with laws from Iceland, the US, China, and the UK as these are the places they operate. Just because you access their service from somewhere else does not force those laws on them. |
Fannie Maes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
200
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 05:46:00 -
[213] - Quote
Ferria wrote:You do understand that there are no international privacy laws, so CCP would only need to comply with laws from Iceland, the US, China, and the UK as these are the places they operate. Just because you access their service from somewhere else does not force those laws on them.
It does if they offer the service there and wish to continue doing so, also if they operate in the UK they have to abide by the EU as well, in all EU states.
Now you know...
Now you know........
PS: there are no international privacy laws, does not have to be either since there are such laws in Iceland and every single nation in the west basically. But they do not apply here, obviously. |
Shian Yang
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 05:48:00 -
[214] - Quote
Fannie Maes wrote:Ferria wrote:You do understand that there are no international privacy laws, so CCP would only need to comply with laws from Iceland, the US, China, and the UK as these are the places they operate. Just because you access their service from somewhere else does not force those laws on them. It does if they offer the service there and wish to continue doing so, also if they operate in the UK they have to abide by the EU as well, in all EU states. Now you know... Now you know........
Greetings capsuleer Maes,
It is useful to have a leg before you try standing. As capsuleer Haphorn has requested; can you please cite the case you were referring to earlier for those of us curious in the facts - rather than random, inventive lies?
Regards,
Shian Yang |
Fannie Maes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
200
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 06:12:00 -
[215] - Quote
Shian Yang wrote:Fannie Maes wrote:Ferria wrote:You do understand that there are no international privacy laws, so CCP would only need to comply with laws from Iceland, the US, China, and the UK as these are the places they operate. Just because you access their service from somewhere else does not force those laws on them. It does if they offer the service there and wish to continue doing so, also if they operate in the UK they have to abide by the EU as well, in all EU states. Now you know... Now you know........ Greetings capsuleer Maes, It is useful to have a leg before you try standing. As capsuleer Haphorn has requested; can you please cite the case you were referring to earlier for those of us curious in the facts - rather than random, inventive lies? Regards, Shian Yang
Greetings, Yeah, they are all lies, to think a person signs a contract by clicking a button and not reading it and that contract can contain anything including that you just sold them your grandmother, to think you don't have to follow any laws in the country you sell your product or offer your service in To think the UK is outside EU law and that CCP is only liable in Iceland. To think there are no trade agreements and laws between countries, yep, all lies, I must have attended a bad business school...
All lies.
Peace |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 07:13:00 -
[216] - Quote
Fannie Maes wrote: It is not a legally binding contract by law, in the US last trial about that had the judge throw the case out. In the EU it has already been declared to violate existing law.
Welcome to the idiot club.
I also do not have to go to one of those places to sue them, I can sue them in any country they operate in as selling their products and services, that includes all of the EU, just FYI that's all!
Shrinkwrap EULA's aren't binding, but ones where you actively subscribe to a service certainly are.
Welcome to the idiot club, I made you some tea. |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 07:16:00 -
[217] - Quote
Fannie Maes wrote:Greetings, Yeah, they are all lies, to think a person signs a contract by clicking a button and not reading it and that contract can contain anything including that you just sold them your grandmother, to think you don't have to follow any laws in the country you sell your product or offer your service in To think the UK is outside EU law and that CCP is only liable in Iceland. To think there are no trade agreements and laws between countries, yep, all lies, I must have attended a bad business school...
CCP is only legally liable in the countries they have a corporate presence in. (Including the EU through the UK). Certainly you can try to bring a suit against them in other countries, but what happens when you win?
|
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 07:29:00 -
[218] - Quote
Fannie Maes wrote:Nope, I wont, I welcome you to ignore me forever because I enjoy watching dumb business students graduate and if lucky work as my bank teller looking jelly when they see my bank account.
Tell us about your kickboxing supermodel girlfriend :allears: |
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 07:40:00 -
[219] - Quote
Fannie Maes wrote: edit 2, let me explain, EULA and TOS is information, whatever is legal in the EULA and TOS informed you of the law, at best case scenario they can be a means to make sure you cannot deny knowing about existing laws. It is however not a contract, it is impossible to be a contract, it can't be a contract, EVER! Anything else in a TOS and EULA that is not in accordance with existing law for everything has no meaning.
Tell us what makes it not a contract.
Ed: That is, which particular aspect of this bilateral agreement makes it not lawful but is also not covered under the severance clause. |
CatreX Nolen
The Syndicate Inc En Garde
10
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 07:42:00 -
[220] - Quote
Doctor Ungabungas wrote:Fannie Maes wrote: edit 2, let me explain, EULA and TOS is information, whatever is legal in the EULA and TOS informed you of the law, at best case scenario they can be a means to make sure you cannot deny knowing about existing laws. It is however not a contract, it is impossible to be a contract, it can't be a contract, EVER! Anything else in a TOS and EULA that is not in accordance with existing law for everything has no meaning.
Tell us what makes it not a contract.
I'm also curious how it's not a contract.
|
|
Henry Haphorn
Aliastra Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 12:24:00 -
[221] - Quote
It is interesting to see that Capsuleer Fannie Maes, whose name is a funny reference to a mortgage insurance company that facilitated the crash of the US housing market - Fannie Mae, has not only failed to produce the case he referenced that would have clearly explained how a EULA/TOS was not considered a legally binding contract but has also willingly refused to produce said case.
Therefore, I will ignore Capsuleer Fannie Maes and so should everyone else.
Oh, and by the way. If someone does try to sue CCP over this eve-mail incident, then this will qualify as a civil trial and the jurisdiction and venue of the civil trial, according to US laws, will depend specifically as to where the defendant lives or operates (not where it's headquartered). Therefore, the court that has jurisdiction over this theoretical case would be a civil court and venue located in Atlanta in George closest to where CCP's Atlanta office is operating. The trial would not be in California as Capsuleer Fannie Maes seems to imply.
Fannie, I suggest you read a ******* book regarding law for once. Welcome to Eve Online. Don't expect people to be nice to you. |
Niko Takahashi
United Starbase Systems
37
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 13:10:00 -
[222] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Aren't alliance mails those things sent to dozens of anonymous strangers at the same time?
"You acknowledge and agree that you have no expectation of privacy regarding communications you make in the Game, whether through private in-Game messaging, during chat, or in chat rooms."
Looks like you agreed already
Clicking a button in an Eula does not legally mean anything. Do not know about the USA but under my countries law whatever electronic form to be legally enforceable it has to have my registered ectronic signature attached.
Meaning you can click away and agree to whatever but in the end of the day they have totally nothing.
However the company as a physicall entity has to fulfill the legal requirements and amount of protective eula blabber is going to change that.
You can enforce it normally.
Tldr Clicking eula agree button means crap and you can not create contract between two parties that is in conflict with the legislation. |
Henry Haphorn
Aliastra Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 13:24:00 -
[223] - Quote
Niko Takahashi wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Aren't alliance mails those things sent to dozens of anonymous strangers at the same time?
"You acknowledge and agree that you have no expectation of privacy regarding communications you make in the Game, whether through private in-Game messaging, during chat, or in chat rooms."
Looks like you agreed already Clicking a button in an Eula does not legally mean anything. Do not know about the USA but under my countries law whatever electronic form to be legally enforceable it has to have my registered ectronic signature attached. Meaning you can click away and agree to whatever but in the end of the day they have totally nothing. However the company as a physicall entity has to fulfill the legal requirements and amount of protective eula blabber is going to change that. You can enforce it normally. Tldr Clicking eula agree button means crap and you can not create contract between two parties that is in conflict with the legislation.
Which Country is that? Welcome to Eve Online. Don't expect people to be nice to you. |
Alnaria Fizolna
Hampton Kardin Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 13:25:00 -
[224] - Quote
If the EULA contains parts not permitted in your country... ... what're you doing accepting it anyway? |
Shpenat
Pafos Technologies
11
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 13:32:00 -
[225] - Quote
Niko Takahashi wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Aren't alliance mails those things sent to dozens of anonymous strangers at the same time?
"You acknowledge and agree that you have no expectation of privacy regarding communications you make in the Game, whether through private in-Game messaging, during chat, or in chat rooms."
Looks like you agreed already Clicking a button in an Eula does not legally mean anything. Do not know about the USA but under my countries law whatever electronic form to be legally enforceable it has to have my registered ectronic signature attached. Meaning you can click away and agree to whatever but in the end of the day they have totally nothing. However the company as a physicall entity has to fulfill the legal requirements and amount of protective eula blabber is going to change that. You can enforce it normally. Tldr Clicking eula agree button means crap and you can not create contract between two parties that is in conflict with the legislation.
I don't think you are correct. Unless you live in some 3rd world country with odd law or no law at all. Nearly every country out there has special laws for software and handling of it. And there is usually written that EULA is binding article (unless it breaks any other law in which case it is void and you cant use that particular product). For general forms, contracts (non software oriented) the electronic signature might be required though. |
Henry Haphorn
Aliastra Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 13:56:00 -
[226] - Quote
One of the misunderstandings about EULAs and TOS's is that some people believe that such agreements are never legally binding. But what is ignored is how they might be considered NOT legally binding and therefore void or null.
It is legally binding if and when there are the following.
1. Offer 2. Acceptance 3. Consideration 4. Legality
Please note that by legality it doesn't mean whether or not a contract is acceptable in general but whether the provisions or goal(s) stated on the contract are allowed in the state or country they are occurring in. For example: CCP stated in the EULA that there are no expectations of privacy in the eve-mail system and have stated that all communications between two or more players through such a system is not private at all. This is mainly because of its in-game nature and purpose. If you post personally identifiable information through such a medium such as you real-life medical records or your real-life bank account information, then it is the fault of the end-user for transmitting such data through a highly insecure channel.
Now, let's change this up a bit and say that CCP wants to add a provision that states that all players are subject to have their homes broken into and have their parents/kids taken in for experimentation to become a humancentipad for Apple. At that point, the EULA/TOS because void because that provision violates the law. The same can be said if the contract involved illegal drugs as part of the transaction and so on.
If the provisions of the contract don't violate any laws and that considerations are met and that an offer is made and the offer is accepted, then contract is valid and enforceable. The contract doesn't even have to be in some kind of special paper. Contracts can be electronic but have to be conspicuous, they can be written on a napkin at a dinner table in a restaurant, or tattooed on your body. Welcome to Eve Online. Don't expect people to be nice to you. |
Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
385
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 14:00:00 -
[227] - Quote
This is a horrible thread and you are all horrible people. There is no facepalm big enough to describe all this. |
Henry Haphorn
Aliastra Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 14:01:00 -
[228] - Quote
Micheal Dietrich wrote:This is a horrible thread and you are all horrible people. There is no facepalm big enough to describe all this.
Sorry, facepalms are not mentioned on the contract. Welcome to Eve Online. Don't expect people to be nice to you. |
Sephira Galamore
Nemesis Holdings Corp Luna Sanguinem
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 14:34:00 -
[229] - Quote
Alright, while I first thought "WTH?", after some thinking , I fear the OP does have a bit of point, depending in which country an offender / offended person lives.
Germany for example (oh, and ofc, IANAL):
1. Parts of TOS / an EULA that contradict current law or are 'under current cirumstances, surprising' are void (BGB -º305 ff.). Consequence of this is, that CCP does not the rights on your written communication, the same way Facebook doesn't. If you post something pubicly on FB you expect everyone to see it, just like you expect everyone to see your character bio. If you sent someone (or a group of people) a message in FB, you expect only them to recieve it - same with EveMails.
2. Electronic communication directed towards an enclosed circle (=non-public) is within the private sphere and thus may not be publicly disclosed. (StGB -º202 / OLG K+¦ln 28 O 178/06) If you send an EveMail to distinct group of players, you expect the mail only to be recieved by those that are, at the time of the transmission, part of that group. This is NOT public communication, since at any given time there is a set amount of members in the group. Thus this mail is part of your private sphere, and if someone discloses this mail publicly, he violates your private sphere. (If he does that against your will, that is)
As you can see, it's not as simple as it might look on first glance.
Of course the OPs claim that CCP would be liable in this is complete nonsense. That would be like.. a mail provider beeing liable for someone reading his mails via POP3 and automatically posting them on your public webspace. :shakes head:
The person that publishs the mail is responsible, and since we are talking about API usage, it's the person that created the API key and thus made public access possible. Again, this all only has relevance if the sender of a mail actually demands de-publication, compensation whatsnot and succeeds with that. (... in Germany, or whatever country has similar laws)
(Correct me if I was wrong somewhere.) |
Henry Haphorn
Aliastra Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 14:48:00 -
[230] - Quote
Sephira Galamore wrote:Alright, while I first thought "WTH?", after some thinking , I fear the OP does have a bit of point, depending in which country an offender / offended person lives.
Germany for example (oh, and ofc, IANAL):
1. Parts of TOS / an EULA that contradict current law or are 'under current cirumstances, surprising' are void (BGB -º305 ff.). Consequence of this is, that CCP does not the rights on your written communication, the same way Facebook doesn't. If you post something pubicly on FB you expect everyone to see it, just like you expect everyone to see your character bio. If you sent someone (or a group of people) a message in FB, you expect only them to recieve it - same with EveMails.
2. Electronic communication directed towards an enclosed circle (=non-public) is within the private sphere and thus may not be publicly disclosed. (StGB -º202 / OLG K+¦ln 28 O 178/06) If you send an EveMail to distinct group of players, you expect the mail only to be recieved by those that are, at the time of the transmission, part of that group. This is NOT public communication, since at any given time there is a set amount of members in the group. Thus this mail is part of your private sphere, and if someone discloses this mail publicly, he violates your private sphere. (If he does that against your will, that is)
As you can see, it's not as simple as it might look on first glance.
Of course the OPs claim that CCP would be liable in this is complete nonsense.
The person that publishs the mail is responsible, and since we are talking about API usage, it's the person that created the API key and thus made public access possible. Again, this all only has relevance if the sender of a mail actually demands de-publication, compensation whatsnot and succeeds with that. (... in Germany, or whatever country has similar laws)
(Correct me if I was wrong somewhere.)
Correct. As stated before, the provisions of the contract have to be legal in the country in which it was accepted. Otherwise, it is void. However, we are only talking about Germany here. Laws differ in every country.
PS:
In regards to the post I made about the page in which the case is mentioned on the book I cited, it turned out that the case is not mentioned. The quotes I posted on page 11 of the thread were copied from the powerpoint. Apparently, the case is not listed in the book and was only provided by my instructor as a reference (the page number was an accident), but I did find the case listed here:
http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/contracts/contracts-keyed-to-murphy/the-bargain-relationship/specht-v-netscape-communications-corporation/
Another posted by Harvard.
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/stjohns/Specht_v_Netscape.pdf Welcome to Eve Online. Don't expect people to be nice to you. |
|
Doctor Ungabungas
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 15:04:00 -
[231] - Quote
Henry Haphorn wrote:Now, let's change this up a bit and say that CCP wants to add a provision that states that all players are subject to have their homes broken into and have their parents/kids taken in for experimentation to become a humancentipad for Apple. At that point, the EULA/TOS because void because that provision violates the law. The same can be said if the contract involved illegal drugs as part of the transaction and so on.
If the provisions of the contract don't violate any laws and that considerations are met and that an offer is made and the offer is accepted, then contract is valid and enforceable. The contract doesn't even have to be in some kind of special paper. Contracts can be electronic but have to be conspicuous, they can be written on a napkin at a dinner table in a restaurant, or tattooed on your body.
Actually the severance clause of the contract would mean that only the parts that are illegal are excluded, the remainder of the contract remains in effect. (Unless of course a judge decides to throw the entire contract out, but that would only occur in situations where so much has been excluded that it makes no sense for the rest to be in effect.) |
Geil Ding
Perkone Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 15:08:00 -
[232] - Quote
Discussing law in a thread like these is difficult and a bit poinless.. Every nation has its own laws. Germany has very strict privacy laws where the USA seems to have no privacy laws at all
My point is, is that I think there might me some national laws being broken. While CCP is not breaking the law themselves, they are facilitating this. This case is different from a mail provider as you have to have the account login to retrieve mails which will also give total control to that account. With the API you can only retrieve information and is made with the intention to share with others. |
Ronja Mistysdottir
Thunderwaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 15:25:00 -
[233] - Quote
Geil Ding wrote:Discussing law in a thread like these is difficult and a bit poinless.. Every nation has its own laws. Germany has very strict privacy laws where the USA seems to have no privacy laws at all My point is, is that I think there might me some national laws being broken. While CCP is not breaking the law themselves, they are facilitating this. This case is different from a mail provider as you have to have the account login to retrieve mails which will also give total control to that account. With the API you can only retrieve information and is made with the intention to share with others.
After Perkone Corp set me at a negative standing after just a few POD kills of your corp members, I have been in a state of war with you. If / when I see you in space, I WILL try to kill you.
To grab your frozen corpse, I will engage in any activity in-game, on forums, via related gaming sites to locate and kill you.
So, hunting and killing, threatening to kill ... how many Real Life laws did that break?.. Guess what, I could not care less, because this is in a game, and you should go bio-mass yourself. |
Sephira Galamore
Nemesis Holdings Corp Luna Sanguinem
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 17:01:00 -
[234] - Quote
Geil Ding wrote:[...] While CCP is not breaking the law themselves, they are facilitating this. This case is different from a mail provider as you have to have the account login to retrieve mails which will also give total control to that account. With the API you can only retrieve information and is made with the intention to share with others.
Well, slightly different example then.. let's say I share my personal Google Calendar with my family, for that I gave them the private URL to the calendar. When someone sends me a mail now that contains an appointment, this will be visible on my calendar. This is an option provided by the calendar and thus intended by Google. Now is Google to blame, when someone else gets hold of my private calendar URL, publishes the calendar on his public website and thus makes all appointment mails publicly available? |
Geil Ding
Perkone Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 17:20:00 -
[235] - Quote
Sephira Galamore wrote:Geil Ding wrote:[...] While CCP is not breaking the law themselves, they are facilitating this. This case is different from a mail provider as you have to have the account login to retrieve mails which will also give total control to that account. With the API you can only retrieve information and is made with the intention to share with others. Well, slightly different example then.. let's say I share my personal Google Calendar with my family, for that I gave them the private URL to the calendar. When someone sends me a mail now that contains an appointment, this will be visible on my calendar. This is an option provided by the calendar and thus intended by Google. Now is Google to blame, when someone else gets hold of my private calendar URL, publishes the calendar on his public website and thus makes all appointment mails publicly available?
The URL is not private if it is accessible by everybody. At best it is a hidden URL. Some very known Torrent sites (won't post the names) are also found guilty (even with their base of operations outside the country) by facilitating breaking the law, yet they do not post the information themselves. |
Henry Haphorn
Aliastra Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 17:25:00 -
[236] - Quote
Sephira Galamore wrote:Geil Ding wrote:[...] While CCP is not breaking the law themselves, they are facilitating this. This case is different from a mail provider as you have to have the account login to retrieve mails which will also give total control to that account. With the API you can only retrieve information and is made with the intention to share with others. Well, slightly different example then.. let's say I share my personal Google Calendar with my family, for that I gave them the private URL to the calendar. When someone sends me a mail now that contains an appointment, this will be visible on my calendar. This is an option provided by the calendar and thus intended by Google. Now is Google to blame, when someone else gets hold of my private calendar URL, publishes the calendar on his public website and thus makes all appointment mails publicly available?
I can see plenty of similarities there. In either case, whether its regarding a calendar URL or an eve API, the business is not to blame for the mishandling of the link in question and the information provided. However, both are designed to be disabled by the original author of the URL or API at any time as intended by Google and CCP Games.
But it is still murky when it comes to various laws around the world. Even if the incident occurred in the US, the laws are further governed by the state laws in addition to the federal laws. The laws of each country are so intricate and complex that it is no wonder that being a lawyer is such a very popular profession. Welcome to Eve Online. Don't expect people to be nice to you. |
Fannie Maes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
215
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 17:26:00 -
[237] - Quote
lol
Your business education is terrible Henry. Would you be so kind as to tell us the name of your school? |
Henry Haphorn
Aliastra Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 17:39:00 -
[238] - Quote
Fannie Maes wrote:lol
Your business education is terrible Henry. Would you be so kind as to tell us the name of your school?
Embry Riddle Aeronautical Univ. (yes, they teach business law), but it's not relevant to this discussion.
My sources are usually gathered from websites of law schools such as Harvard University and books I have run into such as Roger LeRoy Miller's Fundamentals of Business Law: Summarized Cases 9th Edition, which I referenced earlier. I believe this is the current edition.
No, my business education is not terrible. I have had to do accounting work with various businesses and have learned quite a lot about contracts (implied, expressed, or even quasi) in the past.
At least I have done my research into the matter of EULA's and TOS's and have provided my sources to back them up. Welcome to Eve Online. Don't expect people to be nice to you. |
Henry Haphorn
Aliastra Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 18:05:00 -
[239] - Quote
PS:
Fannie, I'm gonna be polite and give you one more chance to please reference the case that negatively affected an End-User License Agreement in a trial.
Please? Welcome to Eve Online. Don't expect people to be nice to you. |
Fannie Maes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
215
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 18:12:00 -
[240] - Quote
Henry Haphorn wrote:PS:
Fannie, I'm gonna be polite and give you one more chance to please reference the case that negatively affected an End-User License Agreement in a trial.
Please?
No thank you As I stated previously, I prefer you live in ignorance and keep making an ass of yourself. Thanks for naming your school, I am sure it is school with excellent standards providing your reading material at harvard university website, I am sure your class starts with Wiki page on EULA & TOS than moves on to google docs.
Have a good day and I suggest you always read EULA and TOS agreements in the future, even for a Firefox utility, I would hate to see you accidentally sell your soul to to a Nigerian prince.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |