SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Terms of Use: Are They Still Enforced?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: E who wrote (1)4/30/2002 8:55:08 PM
From: one_less  Read Replies (1) of 92
 
I am not a lawyer but it is my opinion that once an organization declares a policy, it is ethically and legally responsible for the violations of that policy. If they have established a mechanism for operating under the policy there is more of an obligation to adhere to their own policy. Finally, if they have assigned an agent to administer the policy, then the agent acting for the organization is also responsible. In most cases the organization is more protected by having no policy than having one that they themselves are not enforcing.

Of course, this is a key part of their policy: "It is members' responsibility to bring violations of the Terms of Use by other members to Go2Net's attention, although Go2Net does not guarantee any action based on such information."

Once members have brought violations to their attention, does the organization actually have any responsibility to act on the complaint? The SI policy says there is no guarantee of action. So they have a clear obligation to attend to the complaint and use their "discretion" on action. Reasonable people would interpret this to mean that there may be complaints that they don't feel have enough merit, evidence, or credibility to justify action and that they would rely on their own judgement to determine which complaints qualified for non-action. No one would interpret this part of the policy to mean that they would responsibly choose not to take action when a serious complaint is lodged, backed by credible evidence; especially one that included violations at a criminal level.

The other important issue that I see in the selected TOU is this: If an offense is being committed against a person who is participating in the SI service, is SI in any way liable to the victim? I would say that they are not in any way liable to the victim if it could not be reasonably established that; 1) They should have been aware that the service was being used to commit an offense 2) They had the ability to intervene but did not. 3)They aided or abetted.

I have personally never brought a complaint to the attention of SI.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News