If i tell someone my name, and then they tell someone else my name, is it really my fault that 3rd person now knows my name? particularly if i never said they couldn't tell someone else?

but here's the thing, its a choice to buy microtransactions in a game

That's how they get around info collection

fremium games are basically how socialism works. the top 10% pay for the bottom 90% ability to use the service.

"Its public to see your friends"

the only thing you can use against companies is if they lie, either directly or through omission, of what they are doing with your data.

@Grenade123 are they blameless when they collected that info under the guise of a vague statement that stated they 'need access to contacts to function' or just outright lie and take it without asking? a lot of apps have been found to just copy your contacts without permission, or add that in a future update without notice

see above statements

but when it comes to things like EULAs? thats on you.

see facebook and them forcing opt-outs of new privacy raping 'features'

Eula?

yea if you accept you are basically fucked

End user licence agreement

But if you dont you cant use the service

u know that 100+ page crap that shows up whenever you redeem something on steam?

And thank you grenade

facebook led the way of adding new 'features' without communication, defaulted them to on and had them track you without consent or knowledge

if you don't accept it, you don't use the service....but you don't pay for the service so why do you have any right to use the service?

yes, and as my previous statements, you can use that against the company.

microsoft on updates resets tracking functions back to on randomly as well

the problem is not that they collect this stuff, its that they lie and/or don't tell you.

they ALL lie though, so are any of them blameless?

you can argue that things are too complicated or cumbersome to the point of unreasonable.

why do you still use them if you knows this now?

You're right but it would be nice if they did allow a "no" option to actually mean something and allow you to conti a to use

even discord added an artibitration clause recently to remove your rights to sue without notifying you directly

if you want to argue they need to give up the data they previously collected through lying, that's fine. you can do that, take up a civil lawsuit. thats why we have them

that clause will most likely not hold up in court.

Good luck winning though

not everything in a ToS is enforceable

for example, you can't say "by using this server, we can kill you"

it just has to be reasonably cost prohibitive to enforce your rights

I'm surprised they cant

they could put that in there, no court will adhere to it.

One could argue though why not

wait and the EU will allow that though

If you agreed

probably netherlands at first

ToS, at the end of the day, only protects their ability to kick you off their platform for no reason. And really, even without a ToS they could do that.

most EULA's do to, but they protect against lawsuits not because it makes it illegal for you to sue, its because if you do, they can go "but we did tell you, its right there."

you can still sue and win if the wordage is bad enough