66 points

Poor reporting, as ever. As people have pointed out, you cannot disclaim away the Law. No one can.

If you did a bungee jump, and you sign any kind of waiver, it might protect the company if your glasses fall off and smash. It will not protect them if the rope snaps and break your head.

permalink
report
reply
40 points

Lawyer here: this isn’t necessarily correct and in America it’s state dependent. There are absolutely parts of the law you can waive, including negligence of a party which is likely your bungee jumping scenario with the rope snapping.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Well, I yield to your experience and training , !

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Are T&Cs retroactive? I would think any new T&Cs could only apply from that point forward, not that they could retroactively absolve themselves of liability or how you could pursue it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

IANAL and I don’t claim to fully understand the case, but it looks to me like the reason they might be able to get away with it is that they’re not trying to change anyone’s rights or obligations; they are “merely” changing the mechanism by which disputes are to be resolved. It is of course a pure coincidence that the new mechanism makes it a lot harder to find 23andMe liable for any infractions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

Like all good lawyer answers: maybe. I don’t know enough about the specific amended terms or their data breach. Courts sometimes enforce adhesion contacts and sometimes don’t. But retroactive in and of itself isn’t illegal; for example, if you could edit NOT retroactively settle a dispute, you’d have no settlement agreements.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Ain’t America just grand

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

That’s what the helmet is for.

Silly lemmer, you can’t protect your head with paper. You gotta use a helmet. Psh

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

My understanding is that when signing a liability waiver, first the acknowledgement of risk happens, and then the release of liability. State by state it can be a little bit different for releasing liability, depending on the interpretation. I looked up where I live, and that liability waiver isn’t upheld if one can prove damages (possibly death, in which case someone has to sue upon my lifeless corpse) caused by intentional recklessness, not simply neglect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

It would be interesting to look into some cases. My statement was based on not being able to disclaim negligence at all.

permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points

Too bad, it happened wile the old ToS were active. :p

permalink
report
reply
17 points

Nu-uh, you can’t prove that! And even if you can… LALALA! 🙉

permalink
report
parent
reply
58 points

PSA: you can request deletion of your 23andMe account. It won’t do anything for this past hack, but it’ll at least prevent your data from being included in future hacks (assuming they actually completely delete your data like they’re supposed to).

permalink
report
reply
-1 points
*

Why would you this wasn’t even a hack for my understanding?

It was a password stuffing attack. Meaning that a bunch of users with reused crappy passwords had their accounts accessed with their legitimate passwords by attackers.

I’m not sure why this reflects horribly on the company in a way that would encourage one to delete their account?

This would be like leaving the key to your apartment in a public place and then complaining about your landlords terrible security when someone accesses your house when you’re not there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

They stuffed passwords to get them access to information not just on the compromised accounts’ profiles but to detailed data on a large group of other people whose accounts weren’t compromised through a function within 23andMe’s database browser.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

They didn’t.

They just made it so you couldn’t see it anymore.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

it’s almost always a soft delete, that is, change active field in database to false, coupled with their terms of service that state vaguely how they start the deletion process which could take months and how they may still keep certain data for legitimate purposes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

And this is why I wish we adopted GDPR more… if they are compliant, then they have to remove all data held when requested. Too bad the US will never care that much to respect individuals’ data like that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Exactly. I made a GDPR request for deletion. They can get in big trouble if they are soft deleting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

I feel like ToS changes should require the user to accept before being enforceable with no right to suspend the user’s account if they don’t and when it comes to data it should only apply to data the user shared after the changes…

permalink
report
reply
13 points

pretty sure ToS aren’t enforceable, it’s just that it’s costly to challenge them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
43 points

One thing to note: the email says to send legal@23andme.com an email to opt out while the updated ToS say to email arbitrationoptout@23andme.com.

permalink
report
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 16K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 592K

    Comments