Well, yesterday’s Facebook post certainly blew up today, and it looks like Facebook is currently preparing an official response. In the meantime, a Facebook rep has written to the Industry Standard to emphasize that all rights are subject to your privacy settings, so even if they don’t expire when you close your account, they’ll still be subject to whatever restrictions you had when the account was active. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has also posted a more philosophical response on the Facebook blog saying that while the new Terms of Service are “overly formal,” they’re only meant to give Facebook the legal ability to enable content sharing among users.
Facebook Clarifies Terms Of Service: "We Do Not Own Your Stuff Forever"
By February 16, 2009
Facebook's New Terms Of Service: "We Can Do Anything We Want With Your Content. Forever."
By February 15, 2009
This post has generated a lot of responses, including from Facebook. Check them out here.
Free Subscription Offer From Stonyfield Farm Will Cost You Money
By February 10, 2009
Someone needs to explain to Stonyfield Farm that free usually means that you don’t have to pay any money for the item in question. Especially in a case like this, where you’re already having to send in multiple proofs of purchase to prove you’ve “earned” the “free” item. What you find when you peel back the foil lid is some fine print that explains you also have to pay $2 for this free offer. SLR, who sent in this tip, adds, “I wrote to them via their web site asking what part of free don’t they understand, but received no reply.”
'My Coke Rewards' Program Grows Authentically Smaller, Less Rewarding
By February 3, 2009
If you have a large number of points you better use them in the next few weeks, or be content with getting a large amount of Coke-branded clothing.
Chase Promises To Honor Promotional APR Until Balance Is Paid Off Or They Change Their Mind—Whichever Comes First
By February 1, 2009
Chase doesn’t want to honor an old promotion promising to lock in a customer’s APR until their balance is paid off, so they’re just ignoring the original terms and jacking up interest rates. The bank wants to hike a promised 3.99% rate to either 7.99%, or 5% of the total balance plus a $10 monthly service charge, terms that are dull enough to put you to sleep until you receive the next month’s bill. Inside, Credit Slips walks us through how this is legal, along with tips for recapturing the stolen promotional rate.
When Buying Travel Insurance, Find Out What's Covered First
By January 13, 2009
Richard is angry. He paid good money for travel insurance when he purchased tickets to Italy, and when he ended up having to work over vacation he canceled the trip and filed a claim. Access America denied it because being required to work during a trip isn’t covered by Richard’s benefit plan.
Home Depot Website Prices Have Nothing To Do With In Store Prices
By November 15, 2008
Remember, Home Depot’s price match policy doesn’t apply to online listings, including its own website. At his local store, Michael paid more than twice the online Home Depot price for a coaxial cable, but Home Depot refused to refund him the difference. They even say as much in small print on each page of their website. With Home Depot, be sure to call and get a valid local price quote before heading off to purchase something you saw online.
This Shaw's Pizza Box Is Conflicted
By October 1, 2008
Someone in marketing really wanted to show the handmade goodness of Shaw’s house brand pizza, despite the fact that there is no handmade goodness to the product at all. But not to worry! A little fine print takes care of any legal issues, and you’re good to go.
By September 10, 2008
Something we noticed while looking up info on Blockbuster.com today: the $25 cash back promo they’ve got going with PayPal is still being promoted on the front page of their site, but the fine print says it expired on August 31st. You probably shouldn’t take advantage of that “offer” until Blockbuster clears up the expiration question.
Discover Won't Let Man Opt Out Of Arbitration, Even Though Their Terms Allow It
By September 3, 2008
When John signed up for a Discover card a few months ago, he noticed an interesting item in the fine print—he could opt out of binding arbitration if he sent in a written request that contained a few lines of necessary info and his signature. John followed the instructions, but Discover rejected it. Since then they’ve rejected his request a second time, failed to call him back when promised, and transferred him to CSRs who don’t know what the word means. The latest news: now that 30 days have passed, he’s no longer eligible to opt out. John’s thinking about canceling the card.
Chargebacks Have Geographical Limitations
By May 9, 2008
Longtime Consumerist reader TBT read the fine print for a credit card she recently opened with Bank of America, and discovered that buried in pages 13 and 14 is a section that limits your right to request a chargeback to your home state or within 100 miles of your home address, and only for purchases over $50. He found this shocking, but, actually, this is a limitation provided by the Fair Credit Billing Act. If you dislike it, here’s a great post of ours on writing effective letters to Congress.
Merchant Tries To Forbid Chargebacks
By May 5, 2008
A reader wrote in to ask us if we’ve ever seen anything like the “Chargeback Abuse Policy” that Luxury Car Tuning in Las Vegas includes in their terms—”You agree not to file a credit card or debit card chargeback with regard to any purchase,” and if you do anyway, you have to pay any fees that normally the merchant must pay when dealing with a chargeback. The reader wants to know, “Is this allowed by any merchant agreement that you know of? Sounds pretty ridiculous to me. How likely would it be that they could get away with this?”
Citibank Promises To Credit ATM Fees, But Will Try To Get Out Of It Unless You Badger Them
By April 25, 2008
Tim was pretty sure he met all the conditions of Citibank’s offer to refund ATM fees—he opened his account online and he doesn’t live near a Citi Financial center. When he wasn’t credited, he contacted them to ask why, and was told he had to meet the conditions he’s already met. He had to contact them four times to finally get the $2.00 fee credited as per their advertising. You might be asking yourself, “All that trouble for two dollars?” Well, that’s why he ends his email with this: “Can someone point me in the direction of a better bank that actually provides ‘reimbursement of the fees other banks may charge you for using their ATMs’ without hassle?”
Icy Dock Offers You Rebate Or Warranty, But Not Both
By April 11, 2008
The fine print on this Ice Dock hard disk enclosure rebate (PDF) offered through Newegg says, at the very end, “Manufacturer’s warranty does not apply to ICY DOCK’s MIR Free Promotional items.”
TIME's "Subscribe For $1.99" Offer Misleading
By April 10, 2008
First, we want to say thanks to TIME Magazine for naming us one of their top 25 blogs. Now that’s out of the way, and we can ask why they’re using such a misleading ad on the masthead of their site: “Subscribe to TIME Magazine for just $1.99″ it says! Yes, but when you click through to the sign up form, you see that your “subscription” is for six issues—six weeks—and that the fine print indicates you also agree to an auto-renewed fee of $19.95 every six months. We don’t mind the $1.99 tryout period, but hiding the real subscription fee in fine print is sneaky. Any magazine with the good taste to recognize our blog should also respect its readers enough to be upfront on the details of its subscription offers.
North Vancouver Comfort Inn's "100% Satisfaction Guarantee" Is More Like 10-15%
By March 25, 2008
A man wrote in to travel writer Christopher Elliott to complain about the awful experience he and his wife had with Comfort Inn & Suites in North Vancouver, British Columbia. When they checked in, they were surprised with a “free upgrade,” but found the room was unclean and lacked linens. They asked to be given the room they initially reserved, then discovered the water was lukewarm during their entire visit, and the coffee machine was broken. The hotel’s ice machine was also broken. Richard said in each case he complained to the front desk but only got an apology—and when he contacted Choice Hotels to complain, they told him he should have brought the issues to the attention of the hotel, and consequently they would not honor their 100% Satisfaction Guarantee.
When Buying A New Cell Phone, Ask About The "Buyer's Remorse" Period
By March 12, 2008
Jason bought a couple of new Sidekick phones, but quickly discovered that he and his wife couldn’t live with the abysmal battery life. He called T-Mobile and found out that he had a 14-day window during which he could return the phones for a full refund. Before he sent them back in, however, T-Mobile offered to send him two more batteries via expedited shipping to see if the experience would improve. Jason agreed and tested the new batteries, but still wanted to return the phone. But now he had a problem: he was one day outside his “Buyer’s Remorse” period and T-Mobile wouldn’t let him.
