Quote:
Originally Posted by roadrunner69
"5. Licence for website access
Amazon.co.uk grants you a limited licence to access and make personal use of this website, but not to download (other than page caching) or modify it, or any portion of it, except with express written consent of Amazon.co.uk. This licence does not include any resale or commercial use of this website or its contents; any collection and use of any product listings, descriptions, or prices; any derivative use of this website or its contents; any downloading or copying of account information for the benefit of another merchant; or any use of data mining, robots, or similar data gathering and extraction tools.
This website or any portion of this website may not be reproduced, duplicated, copied, sold, resold, visited, or otherwise exploited for any commercial purpose without our express written consent."
I don't think that “it may be argued†that amazon give any consent for interception.
Taken across the whole WWW this would seem to be a major stumbling block for phorm.
|
I build websites, (mainly for charitable organisations and others involved in working with disabled persons), and when I'm asked about T&Cs I point all my clients to Amazon's site to use as a guide. Simple reason: because they have been written by a qualified lawyer/solicitor and are utterly brilliant.
I applaud Florence for using Amazon's site as a perfect example with respect to how to tell Phorm/Webwise to keep off.
"
This website or any portion of this website may not be reproduced, duplicated, copied, sold, resold, visited, or otherwise exploited for any commercial purpose without our express written consent."
roadrunner69: You've picked out exactly the one part of Amazon's T&Cs I advise all my clients to include, good call.
OB