TechJournal

The End-User License Agreement is a document regular people never read.  Personally, I don't.  However, When Google Chrome was released, I heard reports that it's EULA was kind of shaky.  It was a non-issue to me but others found some clauses that they thought were questionable.

There was one particular clause that bothered others (but did not matter to me) which allowed Google to update the browser automatically and without asking the user.  Sure this could be a hole Google can use to spy on its users  or mine personal data from PC's. Secondly, there was also a clause that was a bit more evil, Google was to gain irrevocable rights to any content submitted through Chrome and republish it to promote their services.

Here is the clause many determined as an act anti privacy, "give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and nonexclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services."

However, as I said, who reads the EULA anyway?  So for the few to whom the clause did matter, I'm sorry for not taking interest.

Anyway, reports today around the web show that a lot more than we expected did not like the EULA  and have been pressuring Google to revise it. 

Rebecca Ward, Google's Sr. Product COunsel for Chrome says that most of the EULA was recycled from their other services to avoid confusion.  Moreover,  she also says that Google is "working quickly to remove language from Section 11 of the current Google Chrome terms of service. This change will apply retroactively to all users who have downloaded Google Chrome."

Would you like to comment?
Join tj.com , or sign in if you are already a member
.