FOX has finally admitted they are a poor excuse for news!

[dirtyduck]

After the AOL terms of service deal, I have been checking out some of the terms on sites I think would also be slimey. Too funny from Fox's TOS... focus on the last statement.

"The Site, and all materials in this Site, are provided "as is" and, to the fullest extent permitted by law, are provided without warranties of any kind either express or implied. This means, without limitation, that FOX DOES NOT WARRANT that the Site is fit for any particular purpose; that the functions contained in the materials in the Site will be uninterrupted; that defects will be corrected; that the Site is free of viruses and other harmful components or that the Site is accurate, error free or reliable."

Yep, that's right, they don't guarantee that the site is accurate, error free, or reliable. They got that right.

[hippiepunk]

1. wow not even trying to hide it anymore..

[atommom]

2. And they even admit it's not necessarily "fit for any particular purpose"!

They're right about that. It's not even entertaining anymore...

[atre]

6. That's a legal term of art...

... and it doesn't quite have the meaning you give it.

UCC 2-315 basically says that when a buyer of goods relies on the seller's skill or judgment in selecting goods and the seller knows or should know of this fact, the buyer is given an "implied warranty" under the Uniform Commercial Code that may give rise to damages for breach of warranty under UCC 2-714.

By the way, no one should ever use AOL under any circumstances! Unless you like getting f*cked by corporate America, that is.

[dirtyduck]

9. obviously it is legal rhetoric, but it's still funny

Also CNN and some others have similar clauses but phrase differently to focus more on potential errors on the site, rather than saying the kinds of things Fox does -- i.e. that they can't guarantee they are reliable, etc.

[atommom]

10. My thoughts exactly!

;)

[globalvillage]

3. This is my favorite part.

"FOX DOES NOT WARRANT that the Site is fit for any particular purpose"

[atre]

8. See my post above

That is a disclaimer of an implied warranty that arises only in particular circumstances.

[kliljedahl]

4. See what you can find

when you read the small print? You've gotta be a lawyer.


http://www.kliljedahl.net

[atre]

7. Actually, by law that can't be in small print or it is not effective

Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code requires conspicuity in the disclaimer of implied warranties.

[underpants]

5. Fox News= "wholly without merit"

http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2004-07-20-advocacy-fox-news_x.htm

The judge dismissed Fox's case, saying it was "wholly without merit," and the trademark "Fair and Balanced," registered by Fox in 1998, was weak. He also said the network was "trying to undermine the First Amendment."

[mattclearing]

11. I think most news sites have this kind of disclaimer.

It's a liability measure, I think.

[Journeyman]

12. Amusing as it is, it's common boilerplate. . .

n/t

[dirtyduck]

13. Just some funny discussion people, no need to waste your debunking skills