I’ve noticed a particular Service (The Weather Channel) having quite old ToS (
"December 6, 2013"). Maybe we could add a new Bad Case along the lines of
"This Service hasn't updated its Terms in a (
very – may or may not include it in the phrasing)
long time.". Obviously the minumum age of a ToS before applying this Case should be discussed here.
It should be bad (I’ll let the weight up to you) because it means it doesn’t specify new stuff that the Law should require them to disclose.
What’s your opinion on this?
I don’t know about this. It could send a message to people responsible for services that updating very frequently is a good thing, when in practice it does burden their users to either spend a lot of time reading terms of service again or risk agreeing to what they haven’t read. Terms that are updated too frequently also do place a burden on us, to constantly add, remove and review points about those documents.
Maybe we should have cases specific to those new legal provisions that are required, but missing, and penalize the ranking for missing that information, instead of simply based on how long ago they have updated the documents.
I agree with @KnossosDomovoi updating ToS frequently isn’t a good thing, especially if they don’t notify you of the changes. I see where you’re coming from as they might not cover newer technology that has been made available but even good services like DuckDuckGo have an old ToS (2012) https://duckduckgo.com/privacy