It's clear cut, you cannot uphold something that wasn't agreed to, like that article pointed out. If you research further cases you will see the pattern, you cannot hold people accountable for something that they didn't agree to.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I appreciate that, however, there is also a caveat which is that space is made for situations where the users of a site, for example, could be reasonably expected to have reviewed the terms of service on a site where they are available.
I don't actually know for sure if the TOS is agreed to or not on signup, because I did it a long time ago - but assuming that they are not then it would not be wrong to say that from a mainstream business perspective, that is a bit of a mistake. I suspect that the heavy assistance they are getting with EOS will mean that there is an agreement to TOS there.
maybe - we shall see
I know dan is against that, but he is working with a lot of others whose views I am not familiar with - generally though it is unusual for such a group to agree to completely ignore legislation.
I have never heard of a large, successful project taking that approach. It will certainly put off a lot of investors.
I was responding to you saying that "it's not unusual" which implies there are several examples at least, beyond steem. I am saying that if Steemit/Steem are operating in that way then they are the only example I know of and therefore, I am unclear as to how the experiment will play out for them in the medium term.. The uncertainty means that while Steem/Steemit can be said to be successful currently, there is a question mark over it's future success due to the potential for government interference.