On 8 September 2011 22:13, Geoff Brigham <gbrig...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > Hi, > > In the legal department at the Wikimedia Foundation, we have been examining > for some time whether, as the 5th largest website in the world, we need a > new terms of use agreement. Given our size and the need to ensure good > communication with our users, I think we do, so we’ve put ourselves to > drafting a new version with the hopes that we could get your review, > comments, and ideas. > > - You can find the current version of our terms of use here: > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_use . > - You can view the new draft here: > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use
To what extent are terms of use like this actually meaningful? Are there any precedents of them being upheld in court? If so, in what jurisdictions? Does using a website really constitute acceptance of a contract that everyone knows you haven't read? If you're not actually going to be able to do anything with these terms of use, then we shouldn't have any. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
