flickr operates above the law [UPDATED]

Photos

flickr operates above the law

see larger image

uploaded by dysamoria

• 

  uploaded by dysamoria | add comment

• 

  uploaded by Contra_dictioN | add comment

• 

  uploaded by Pepitoid | add comment

This is a followup to my previous Flickr articles:

1 and 2

Apprently, you can create and break laws by making up unenforcable "contracts" and "terms of use" agreements. You can take a customer's payment and then deny them the service they have purchased so long as you define their use of the service as being in violation of that "agreement." This has been going on in the computer industry for some time and no judges are willing to take this issue to task and set precedents. Here is my most recent personal experience with "businesses which operate above the law."

As you may know, i recently posted an open letter to Stewart Butterfield, one of the founders of flickr, in response to the deletion of my account. i've received no response to ANY communication attempts to flickr or yahoo about any of this. For about a month, now, this has been going on and i'm tired of playing.

Recently, in order to relocate my contacts, i created a new account on flickr. i put in some of the very same images i had in my previous account. They were set to be moderated (meaning, unviewable except by people who have "safe search" turned off). There are far worse images on flickr than those that i posted. i posted some conversation to the forums where people were complaining about deletion of accounts...

My icon was a statement about flickr's way of treating me. Something that is NOT uncommon on flickr these days. It states "Flickr Hates Me."

Tonight, i received this:

Flickr Support wrote:

Hi [deleted] dysamoria,

In joining Flickr, you agreed to abide by the Terms of
Service. The content of your account, specifically the
images of bodily harm, violate the TOS. Therefore, your
account has been terminated.

Regards,

Heather

case364591@support.flickr.com

The way i see it, this is clearly a situation of abuse and targeting of customers that staff do not like.

This is the second time they have deleted my account under dubious claims of violating their so-called TOS/TOU (varies depending on which staff messages you). The previous account was a paid pro account. ALL THE SAME EXACT IMAGES WERE PRESENT IN THAT ACCOUNT AND NO ONE EVER HAD ANY ISSUE WITH THEM IN THE 1.5 YEARS THE ACCOUNT EXISTED.

MY PREVIOUS ACCOUNT WAS REVIEWED AS BEING SAFE!!

i have made more than 6 inquiries to flickr through their support forms, direct emails to PR at yahoo and Stewart Butterfield and NOT ONE SINGLE RESPONSE has been made in one month. How is this legal? This business takes your money, throws a "contract" at you (which, if you've ever been involved with real, actual contracts, is totally invalid) and somehow they are allowed to deny you service and keep your payment?

Maybe it is time to see what the BBB has to say about this kind of business operation.

UPDATE: it's not much, but here's what i filed for now:

The following is a copy of the complaint that you filed with us. You may check the status of your complaint at anytime.

Hello Jacey Cavacini
Thank you for your complaint.
Please find below the details of the complaint you entered on the web:

Prefix: Mr.
First Name: Jacey
Last Name: Cavacini
Country: USA
E-Mail: dysamoria a t dysamoria d o t com

Model Name:

Summary Line:

Service Fee Theft: Flickr.com, owned by Yahoo.com, deleted my account without valid reasoning and refuses to respond to communication. No refund.
Complaint Description:

My subject/target of complaint: Yahoo's Flickr Management. Flickr is an online community tool/property formerly independently Canadian owned, now owned by Yahoo, Inc. Flickr management and Yahoo PR refuse to respond to ANY communication. The complaint: my subscription fee has been stolen. Reasoning: i renewed my paying subscriber account for Flickr.com "Pro" service in June of 2007. In a dispute with another flickr subscriber who was harassing me, i entered into a dispute with flickr staff ("Michelle"). My attempts at reasoning with flickr staff were ignored. They simply chose to "define" my actions as "violations" of flickr's "Terms Of Use" "agreement." They eventually deleted my account, which i have paid for in full, expiring in June of 2008. No refund has been offered, full or in part. No communication has been responded to. i have contacted their support about a dozen times with only automated responses. i have contacted Yahoo PR and one of the co-founders of Flickr, without response. i created a second "free" account on flickr to locate the members of the community i was previously "connected to" via my prior account. i posted some of my photos that i had previously posted in the prior account as well as a few complaints in the forums. Tonight, i received notice that they deleted my account, again citing invalid reasoning (claiming my images violated the terms, yet these same images were in my previous account, which was REVIEWED by staff and designated as SAFE).
Resolution Sought:

1. Reinstate my ORIGINAL "dysamoria" account at flickr.com, AS IT WAS PRIOR TO STAFF INVOLVEMENT. Or:

2. Reinstate my ORIGINAL "dysamoria" account at flickr.com, AS IT WAS, but with the material they are "disputing" blocked from the PUBLIC until an agreement can be reached with flickr staff on how to handle the material in a way that does not violate this so-called agreement. Or:
3. Provide me with a complete and full refund for service fees paid (for time period June 2007 to June 2008).

Date Problem Started: 09/07/2007
Amount in Dispute: $24.95
Complaint Type: Customer Service

If you have any questions regarding your complaint, please contact the Complaint Dept. at (909) 825-7280.
Thank you, Complaint Dept. BBB of the Southland, Inc.

More to say about this:

This is theft of service fee monies paid and services withdrawn without refund (partial or otherwise). i refuse to allow corporate arrogance and "End User License Agreement" politics to abuse customers. If i have to be an example here, too, so be it. i cannot exist in a world that allows this. i fought the computer industry years ago and it ate me up. They've just gotten worse and their politics are spreading elsewhere. Here i go again.

This is a prime example of the concept of "slippery slope" where rights and laws are bypassed and ignored by way of power and misapplication of "contractual terms." This is part of what is destroying my ability to live in this country. i have experienced it at so many levels, i can't just let it lie. My former career, my former union, the products and services, the schools, the doctors, etc. This is all a very related and connected issue in my eyes and i cannot abide by this immoral and illegal behavior.



No one can simply create a set of terms that they can hold someone to, without it being a proper contract, with bargaining, signatures, legal validity... It is also illegal to attempt to hold someone to a contract who's contents breaks laws. Such a contract is invalid. You can't just write an "agreement" and declare you're holding your [customers/employees/members/etc] to that "agreement" if it violates laws/statutes/etc.



What happens when this kind of political and legal abuse gets into health providers? Do we throw our hands up and stop fighting when services are denied because they are overstepping the law by inventing false terms for their customers?

What about when your new car or home appliance comes with an EULA stating that "the entire risk of the purchase is on you" and "no warranty of any kind, including fitness for a particular purpose..." ? What do you do then?

Then it's too late.



i have personally been abused by this kind of manipulation too many times, be that as an EULA, TOU, Job Description, or whatever.


"Using the letter of the law to defeat the spirit of the law" is a concept that needs to be brought back to the public eye and splattered

on the front pages. The rights we are losing as citizens to our government at the hands of our current political regime are very much tied to

the loss of rights as consumers at the hands of "legalese" authors and the same lobbyists who are responsible for other humanitarian crimes.