Ok,they are basically telling Google to share data about it's users and user preferences to it's rivals and probably also US Government.
So,first thing, spying on users is bad. It might be ok to collect user's information with their consent to improve the service(like Google is doing now),but isn't it written in Terms and conditions that those data will be used to improve services(not sharing/using them for personal gains)?
Also, is Microsoft sharing data of Windows users with other rivals too?
> but isn't it written in Terms and conditions that those data will be used to improve services(not sharing/using them for personal gains)?
Most T&Cs do not stand up once they get to court. Part of contract negotiation requires that the person agreeing, is capable of understanding and agreeing. Walls of text don't fit that definition.
Google tries very hard to work around limitations such as these in the "About these Terms" [0], with such gems as:
> If it turns out that a particular term is not valid or enforceable, this will not affect any other terms.
Which in itself may not always be legal to say. It isn't as simple as Google simply making statements. Unless the two involved in the contract, Google and the user, have an equal say in things, then the contract enters into grey areas of law. Where they have found themselves unprotected on occasion.
If Google says they're not going to share data, and then shares the data 'because it wasn't really a contract, cause you all didn't really consent', that's pretty ballsy.
I think you've taken my explanation the wrong way. You're not in the grey if you do something outside of the agreement. You will definitely get hurt if you do that.
But just because Google says they can do something... Doesn't mean that they can.
Almost every contract has terms like "If it turns out that a particular term is not valid or enforceable, this will not affect any other terms" in it, because some specific terms may not be enforceable in some jurisdictions.
Every contract I write has this term, and I can't think of one I've signed that doesn't.
That statement, called a "severability clause", is there precisely because otherwise some other unenforceable provision would void the entire contract anyway. Judges can decide to just throw out your contract in a dispute, rather than pare it down for you. In fact they probably would do that as a rule.
> And that statement can be used to revoke the entire contract in certain jurisdictions.
Are you claiming that including language similar to "If it turns out that a particular term is not valid or enforceable, this will not affect any other terms" will make the contract unenforceable?
What jurisdictions? Do you have any examples?
I've never heard of this and I've spoke to lawyers about it previously, and some quick searching terms up nothing like this.
In Australia it falls under "terms that enable one party (but not another) to vary the terms of the contract." and "terms that enable one party (but not another) to avoid or limit their obligations under the contract" which contravenes the Unfair Contract Terms regime under the Australian Consumer Law.
I'm in Australia, and this is categorically not true.
This term doesn't allow Google to vary the contract. Instead it says if a court finds a specific term is unenforceable that doesn't invalidate the rest of the contract.
Here's guidance from the Australian government clausebank, which is a shared resource for common contract clauses in Australia:
"This clause provides that any illegal or otherwise unenforceable contract terms are removed from the Contract, with the remainder of the Contract remaining valid and enforceable between the parties.... While use of this clause is optional, it is common for contracts to include a clause of this type."
So,first thing, spying on users is bad. It might be ok to collect user's information with their consent to improve the service(like Google is doing now),but isn't it written in Terms and conditions that those data will be used to improve services(not sharing/using them for personal gains)?
Also, is Microsoft sharing data of Windows users with other rivals too?