The MySpace Abuser

[styroe]

I was reading some more of this ridiculous story, and it seems that the entire defense of this woman [Lori Drew, 40] (who if you don't know faked an Online persona of an 18 year old boy to gain the romantic interested of a 13 year old girl and then blow her off, and then she committed suicide). It turns out the whole defense for this woman (who is being charged with conspiracy and breaking myspace user agreement) is stating that she never read the user agreement on Myspace and therefore it doesn't count, because no one read it.

But wait there is more, I was reading the reponses to this story, and someone asked "since when does a user agreement on a social website become legally binding"... umm... when you agree to it? Crazy people out there. Am I wrong to think that the user agreement is therefore not a legal contract, because if these user agreements aren't contracts, well I've never read a user agreement for music either, I'll go download it for free. (I am being facetious)

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: styroe
I was reading some more of this ridiculous story, and it seems that the entire defense of this woman [Lori Drew, 40] (who if you don't know faked an Online persona of an 18 year old boy to gain the romantic interested of a 13 year old girl and then blow her off, and then she committed suicide). It turns out the whole defense for this woman (who is being charged with conspiracy and breaking myspace user agreement) is stating that she never read the user agreement on Myspace and therefore it doesn't count, because no one read it.

But wait there is more, I was reading the reponses to this story, and someone asked "since when does a user agreement on a social website become legally binding"... umm... when you agree to it? Crazy people out there. Am I wrong to think that the user agreement is therefore not a legal contract, because if these user agreements aren't contracts, well I've never read a user agreement for music either, I'll go download it for free. (I am being facetious)

Just because you click 'I Agree' doesn't necessarily mean it is legally binding. If someone can argue hot coffee... nevermind.

 

[Robor]

Further proof MySpace is the devil

 

[styroe]

Alright, the coffee is a bit ridiculous, but isn't the statement saying 'I agree" well kind of, I don't know, definitive?

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: styroe
Alright, the coffee is a bit ridiculous, but isn't the statement saying 'I agree" well kind of, I don't know, definitive?

I guess one could argue that you agreed to press the 'I agree' button. I really have no idea. I'm just saying that crazy shit happens in court all the time.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: styroe
Alright, the coffee is a bit ridiculous, but isn't the statement saying 'I agree" well kind of, I don't know, definitive?

Who really reads all the EULA and TOS when they register for a website or install software?

Edit: If they (the writers) expect people to read them they should be short (to the point) and in plain english rather than legalese.

 

[ahurtt]

If people actually read EULA's and TOS on software, nobody would ever actually agree and the software industry would go broke. Just do what I do when somebody asks me, "Didn't you agree to the EULA terms?" Just say, "Yeah but I lied."

 

[StageLeft]

I have no idea what's in those. My last home mortgage also included about 30 signatures and literally a 2" stack of paper. Obviously I didn't read it, who has the f**king time? It would have taken me a week plus another 20 hours with a $200/hour lawyer to even figure out what the hell it meant. These things we all sign are over the top. For all I know I owe him my kids when they turn 10.

I don't know what this lady is being charged with. Surely she didn't know this girl would commit suicide and cannot really be held responsible for that in particular, no matter how much of a stupid old b*tch she obviously is.

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: styroe
Alright, the coffee is a bit ridiculous, but isn't the statement saying 'I agree" well kind of, I don't know, definitive?

No. Just because you clicked "I agree" does not automatically mean the terms of the contract are legally valid and/or enforceable. For example, if the TOS said "I agree to give up my first born child to xyz company", and you clicked "I agree" without reading it, you think that contract would be enforced?

I think this suit is idiotic, regardless of what you think of Lori Drew.

 

[styroe]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I have no idea what's in those. My last home mortgage also included about 30 signatures and literally a 2" stack of paper. Obviously I didn't read it, who has the f**king time? It would have taken me a week plus another 20 hours with a $200/hour lawyer to even figure out what the hell it meant. These things we all sign are over the top. For all I know I owe him my kids when they turn 10.

I don't know what this lady is being charged with. Surely she didn't know this girl would commit suicide and cannot really be held responsible for that in particular, no matter how much of a stupid old b*tch she obviously is.

I belive the conspiracy in a criminal sense, but that usually coincides with an intent to perform a crime... I think it has something to do with cyber bullying policy, though I am unclear whether that is criminal or in the aforementioned myspace agreement. If it is the latter, than I don't know if it could be considered a criminal conspiracy. However, the parents have a rather compelling civil case in my opinion

 

[styroe]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: styroe
Alright, the coffee is a bit ridiculous, but isn't the statement saying 'I agree" well kind of, I don't know, definitive?

No. Just because you clicked "I agree" does not automatically mean the terms of the contract are legally valid and/or enforceable. For example, if the TOS said "I agree to give up my first born child to xyz company", and you clicked "I agree" without reading it, you think that contract would be enforced?

I think this suit is idiotic, regardless of what you think of Lori Drew.

Assuming that position to be true (which I am on page with you) if those terms are valid and enforceable, then are they legally binding?

*side note* And why does everyone use the Rumpelstiltskin defense?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

No. Just because you clicked "I agree" does not automatically mean the terms of the contract are legally valid and/or enforceable. For example, if the TOS said "I agree to give up my first born child to xyz company", and you clicked "I agree" without reading it, you think that contract would be enforced?

Your example fails because, under the laws of contract, an agreement to perform an illegal act is not enforceable. A parent cannot sell, barter or abandon his/her child under such an agreement. MySpace's TOS do not include any illegal or otherwise barred acts, and anyone of legal age who accepts them and uses the service would be bound by them.

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: styroe

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: styroe
Alright, the coffee is a bit ridiculous, but isn't the statement saying 'I agree" well kind of, I don't know, definitive?

No. Just because you clicked "I agree" does not automatically mean the terms of the contract are legally valid and/or enforceable. For example, if the TOS said "I agree to give up my first born child to xyz company", and you clicked "I agree" without reading it, you think that contract would be enforced?

I think this suit is idiotic, regardless of what you think of Lori Drew.

Assuming that position to be true (which I am on page with you) if those terms are valid and enforceable, then are they legally binding?

*side note* And why does everyone use the Rumpelstiltskin defense?

If the terms are valid and enforceable, then they are binding, but there would also need to be some stipulation as to what remedies (if any) the plaintiff (myspace) can seek. Odds are, it's not very well defined.

I agree with you that a civil suit stands a pretty good chance of succeeding, even though I don't think it should. I don't see any merit in it, but nowadays the blame for everything must always get pinned on someone else.

 

[styroe]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: styroe

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: styroe
Alright, the coffee is a bit ridiculous, but isn't the statement saying 'I agree" well kind of, I don't know, definitive?

No. Just because you clicked "I agree" does not automatically mean the terms of the contract are legally valid and/or enforceable. For example, if the TOS said "I agree to give up my first born child to xyz company", and you clicked "I agree" without reading it, you think that contract would be enforced?

I think this suit is idiotic, regardless of what you think of Lori Drew.

Assuming that position to be true (which I am on page with you) if those terms are valid and enforceable, then are they legally binding?

*side note* And why does everyone use the Rumpelstiltskin defense?

If the terms are valid and enforceable, then they are binding, but there would also need to be some stipulation as to what remedies (if any) the plaintiff (myspace) can seek. Odds are, it's not very well defined.

I agree with you that a civil suit stands a pretty good chance of succeeding, even though I don't think it should. I don't see any merit in it, but nowadays the blame for everything must always get pinned on someone else.

I wonder if I can sue the estates of our forefathers. I mean... there's gotta be something, right?

 

[Pacemaker]

A civil suit charging intentional affliction of emotional distress seems like a slam dunk as they admitted to it, but then again I'm not a lawyer.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Pacemaker
A civil suit charging intentional affliction of emotional distress seems like a slam dunk as they admitted to it, but then again I'm not a lawyer.

no such thing.

 

[styroe]

Originally posted by: Pacemaker
A civil suit charging intentional affliction of emotional distress seems like a slam dunk as they admitted to it, but then again I'm not a lawyer.

I'll give that it may not be an accurately worded lawsuit, but something with that general concept, absolutely possible.

 

[venkman]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: styroe
I was reading some more of this ridiculous story, and it seems that the entire defense of this woman [Lori Drew, 40] (who if you don't know faked an Online persona of an 18 year old boy to gain the romantic interested of a 13 year old girl and then blow her off, and then she committed suicide). It turns out the whole defense for this woman (who is being charged with conspiracy and breaking myspace user agreement) is stating that she never read the user agreement on Myspace and therefore it doesn't count, because no one read it.

But wait there is more, I was reading the reponses to this story, and someone asked "since when does a user agreement on a social website become legally binding"... umm... when you agree to it? Crazy people out there. Am I wrong to think that the user agreement is therefore not a legal contract, because if these user agreements aren't contracts, well I've never read a user agreement for music either, I'll go download it for free. (I am being facetious)

Just because you click 'I Agree' doesn't necessarily mean it is legally binding. If someone can argue hot coffee... nevermind.

When you click "'I Agree" it is a binding contract between you and the other party. Now, any stipulation in that contract that violates the laws in your home state would not be enforceable, but everything else is.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: styroe
Am I wrong to think that the user agreement is therefore not a legal contract

Actually the defense is correct... in reality, the user agreements are not legally binding. It protects the company from the user/visitor/member, but it doesn't put fault onto user/visitor/member.

 

[dawp]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I don't know what this lady is being charged with. Surely she didn't know this girl would commit suicide and cannot really be held responsible for that in particular, no matter how much of a stupid old b*tch she obviously is.

I've read that the daughter, Sarah, If not Lori herself was well aware the Megan was under treatment for depression and suicidal thoughts and taking meds for it. She should have knows that it was a possible outcome in such circumstances.

edit:

Sarah also knew that she had threatened suicide before.

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

No. Just because you clicked "I agree" does not automatically mean the terms of the contract are legally valid and/or enforceable. For example, if the TOS said "I agree to give up my first born child to xyz company", and you clicked "I agree" without reading it, you think that contract would be enforced?

Your example fails because, under the laws of contract, an agreement to perform an illegal act is not enforceable. A parent cannot sell, barter or abandon his/her child under such an agreement. MySpace's TOS do not include any illegal or otherwise barred acts, and anyone of legal age who accepts them and uses the service would be bound by them.

Suppose there was a clause, hidden well down in the TOS agreement, that said that after 1 year of use you agree to pay $10,000 to MySpace.

According to you, since nothing in that $10,000 stipulation is illegal, everyone who agreed to the TOS would be obligated to pay $10,000.

But in real life if MySpace tried to collect, they'd be laughed out of court. Why? Because their claim could be rebutted with the assertion that MySpace knew and knows that no one reads TOSs carefully, and that MySpace just put the $10,000 provision in the TOS to take advantage of people's predictable lack of care.

So a provision in a TOS has to be more than just legal. It also has to be reasonable and within the realm of the normal expectations of average users.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Pacemaker
A civil suit charging intentional affliction of emotional distress seems like a slam dunk as they admitted to it, but then again I'm not a lawyer.

Right. I doubt this case revolves around contract issues. It's a tort issue (e.g., infliction of emotional distress).

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I have no idea what's in those. My last home mortgage also included about 30 signatures and literally a 2" stack of paper. Obviously I didn't read it, who has the f**king time? It would have taken me a week plus another 20 hours with a $200/hour lawyer to even figure out what the hell it meant. These things we all sign are over the top. For all I know I owe him my kids when they turn 10.

I don't know what this lady is being charged with. Surely she didn't know this girl would commit suicide and cannot really be held responsible for that in particular, no matter how much of a stupid old b*tch she obviously is.

I would think you would... You do have almost 58,000 posts.

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

No. Just because you clicked "I agree" does not automatically mean the terms of the contract are legally valid and/or enforceable. For example, if the TOS said "I agree to give up my first born child to xyz company", and you clicked "I agree" without reading it, you think that contract would be enforced?

Your example fails because, under the laws of contract, an agreement to perform an illegal act is not enforceable. A parent cannot sell, barter or abandon his/her child under such an agreement. MySpace's TOS do not include any illegal or otherwise barred acts, and anyone of legal age who accepts them and uses the service would be bound by them.

You are wrong on that one. It's not just a matter of "as long as the terms of the agreement are legal, then they will be enforced". The contract can be held unenforcable or voided for a number of reasons, including being seen as unconscionable, unreasonable etc. The matter of enforceability of EULA's and TOS agreements etc is far from being completely settled law.