Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Last year I signed up for a paid subscription to Grammarly...then I read terms of use[1]. I know...it should have been the other way around, but here it goes:

> "By uploading or entering any User Content, you give Grammarly (and those it works with) a nonexclusive, worldwide, royalty-free and fully-paid, transferable and sublicensable, perpetual, and irrevocable license to copy, store and use your User Content in connection with the provision of the Software and the Services and to improve the algorithms underlying the Software and the Services."

First I thought that may be this is just me being paranoid. So I compared their terms of service with Evernote's[2] and summarize the differences for them in the support ticket asking termination of my account. I reproduce that here for reference:

> In Evernote's TOS

> – It's clearly noted that the user retains their Copyright to the content;

> – and the license to Evernote is a limited and they don't "obtain any right, title or > interest" other than they point out;

> – they don't require sublicensable and transferable rights to User Content which is different than having the rights to share the content with other contractual partners (which they require);

> – the agreement on content is irrevocable as long as the content is stored on the service.

[1]: https://www.grammarly.com/terms

[2]: https://evernote.com/legal/tos.php

Edit: Formatting.




Thanks! Uninstalled straight away. I think the TOS issue is more important than the security one.


Is the grammarly ToS more than a CYA? I think they may do it that way to protect themselves from being sued after retaining your work. But I don't like the possibility of them owning your work.


I agree that like many of such documents, it is CYA indeed. I don't mind CYA, but this is just sloppy encroaching legalese gobbledygook.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: