flickr operates above the law

This is a followup to my previous Flickr article...

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.

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.