Bob,
Would you please publicly comment on this post?
Message 8419606
I know that you are aware of the background of this controversy, but if you need to refresh your memory, look back to the post I am responding to and follow the various links forward.
It seems to me that the fact that Daniel Miller and some others (such as Fatt Matt) are below 18 years of age should result in immediate termination of their SI accounts under the current terms of use.
Basically, they have certified that they are of age when, in fact, they are not. This situation is analogous to a minor walking into a bar and trying to buy a beer. If the bartender does not card them, he may not be liable (but usually is), but if he knows (such as in the case of Daniel Miller) that he is underage, the bartender is subject to severe legal penalties.
Since SI has not terminated these minor accounts, despite the enormous amount of external publicity (Bloomberg, CNBC, WSJ, etc.) and the ongoing SI discussion, it seems that SI is willing to sign up and retain minors as members.
If so, then SI should modify the present terms of use eliminating the explicit statement:
5.1 Current fees may be obtained by going to the Features Overview or Register sections of the Silicon Investor site. The membership is personal to you, and
you may not assign or otherwise transfer your rights or obligations to anyone. You certify that you are 18 years or older and you agree to be responsible for
and pay any charges incurred in connection with your user name and password. The membership shall continue until we receive notice of termination from you
or we exercise our rights of termination as described in the Terms of Use. We reserve the right to change at any time the membership fees and billing methods.
to eliminate the age requirement.
I wonder if the SI disclaimer will stand up to litigation when/if the SEC goes after DM? It seems to me that your position will be greatly weakened by the year-long toleration of a minor posting on your site.
Regards,
Tom Swift |
