I had an unfortunate head desk moment this morning on reading that Google Ads (such as the ones to the right on your screen) reserves the right to pull their service if you engage in “any action or practice that reflects poorly on Google or otherwise disparages or devalues Google’s reputation or goodwill.” This looks suspiciously like the terms of service my fellow travelers on net neutrality slagged AT&T for using.
In both cases, I expect that the intent is not to yank people who say nasty things about the parent company, but to reserve the right to yank the service when someone does something revolting. “Look, NAMBLA uses Google Ads, Google supports pederasts.” or “Look, the worlds worst spammers have AT&T connections, they support spam.” By why can’t my lawyer colleagues just say so, instead of writing something so broad that it covers even general criticism? Yes, “tarnish” is one of those words of art that all us legal folks understand has a very specific meaning. But it doesn’t do a damn bit of good when folks who are trying to understand the terms of service are not lawyers, which — outside of DC — covers most of the user population.
I have no doubt that the usual suspects will be out baying for blood and denunciations like the staff of the Clinton and Obama campaigns after a rival campaign staffer sneezes funny. So even though I did not give a rat’s patootie on the AT&T terms of service (being a lawyer and understanding what it meant), I shall now both condemn Google for being so stupid and test their policy by making several derogatory comments about GoogleAds.
[Begin OUTRAGEOUS accent]
Hey, GoogleAds! I fart in your general direction! I wave my very naughty bits at you! You are so lame, you copy terms of service from AT&T!
Now change your TOS to something sensible or I shall taunt you some more.
[end OUTRAGEOUS accent]
Did the ads on the screen disappear? No. Good. Can we consider this settled and actually get back to real policy?
Keep this up and I shall need to make a major speech about “Terms of Service In America” and invite us all together for some major healing.
Stay tuned . . . .
The question is what not who of course.
What I find interesting is the concept that you have a paying customer using the ‘service’ whatever it is, yet if you use the service ‘wrong’ they will yank you. Only in the virtual world! In the physical world you rarely find instances of where a paying customer is the source of such activities. I mean, not much chance I will be dissing the BK Whopper at the drive thru of the Burger King.
An intriguing situation.