back to article 'Joan Is Awful' Black Mirror episode rebounds on Netflix

Searches for "Netflix terms and conditions" skyrocketed 1,524 percent after the streaming platform debuted Black Mirror season six. The new season's first episode, "Joan Is Awful," serves up a cautionary tale of accepting online terms and conditions without actually reading them. Major data privacy violations, among other …

  1. NoneSuch Silver badge
    Big Brother

    OK, text recording started. Comment away!

  2. Flip
    Thumb Up

    Great spoof

    A humourous cautionary tale for sure, but the ending is totally worth the cringeworthy moments! Plus, Salma Hayek!

    1. Androgynous Cupboard Silver badge

      Re: Great spoof

      Yep - brilliant episode. Charlie Brooker also skewers - perfectly - the focus on negative emotions by media companies focus as it drives more engagement. Plus a great rollcall of some genuinely great comedy actors - Lolly Adefope and a most unexpected Rich Fulcher (unexpected because he wasn't going batshit crazy)

    2. big_D

      Re: Great spoof

      This was my first introduction to Black Mirror... I found it plodding, predictable and a rehashing of arguments I've been spouting at friends and family for nearly 2 decades - and at my previous job, I was tasked with actually reading such contracts on behalf of the company and its CEO and pointing out any such discrepancies, before they signed on the dotted line (or clicked the Accept button).

      That said, I held out because of Salma.

    3. jmch Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: Great spoof

      Brilliant episode....

      ...also good to know - Any terms and conditions that conflict with any actual laws are void and unenforceable. (That's why most contracts include a severability clause through which having one clause voided doesn't void the entire thing). Many companies know this but rely on their customers not knowing it and/or not willing to 'lawyer up'.

      In any scenario similair to the 'Joan is awful' episode, GDPR or equivalent legislation allows a data subject to withdraw their consent at any time.

      I AM surprised, though, that many people's takeaway from that episode was to check Netflix's T&Cs because by far the most disturbing takeaway from the episode wasn't the abuse of T&Cs, it was the total surveillance that allowed near-real-time spying on every single aspect of the subject's life.

  3. captain veg Silver badge

    Netflix?

    That's the one which works via an app on your mobe or PC?

    title character Joan finds her life turned into a TV show because she signed Streamberry's terms and conditions without reading the fine print. In doing so, she gave the streaming service permission to use her likeness and her life for CGI content.

    So entirely plausible.

    shortly after "Joan In Awful" debuted, the streaming giant launched its own Streamberry site with a "You Are Awful" virtual experience.

    Ha ha.

    So they really were doing it.

    -A.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Terminator

    Black mirror: it's either genuine over-the-top woke-ness or parody

    In the first fifteen minutes we get, the gender divergent dude, the lesbian couple and the inter-racial couple. Considering it was written by Charlie Brooker, Black Mirror is either genuine over-the-top' woke-ness or parody, so obtuse that the target audience don't even get it.

    1. StewieGriffin

      Re: Black mirror: it's either genuine over-the-top woke-ness or parody

      Genuinely, give it a rest. Normal people are exhausted with this crap.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Boffin

        Re: Black mirror: it's either genuine over-the-top woke-ness or parody

        @StewieGriffin: “Genuinely, give it a rest. Normal people are exhausted with this crap.”

        You're absolutely right. I for one am sick of being on the end of sermons in wokeness in virtually every property emanating out of Hollywood. When they're not doing that, they are engaged in destroying legacy cultural icons.

        For instance, there a parody superhero series “The Boys” depicting the Superman character ‘Homelander’ standing on top of a tall building, fapping off to ‘The Beach Boys’ - “God Only Knows”, whilst yelling at the top of his voice “I can do whatever I want”.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Black mirror: it's either genuine over-the-top woke-ness or parody

      Yeah, I miss the 1970s when disaster movies limited the non-mainstream characters to the occasional nun, pregnant woman, or alcoholic priest.

      1. Locky
        Trollface

        Re: Black mirror: it's either genuine over-the-top woke-ness or parody

        So someone who grew up in the 70's, "occasional nun, pregnant woman, or alcoholic priest" pretty much describes my years in catholic education

      2. Korev Silver badge
        Windows

        Re: Black mirror: it's either genuine over-the-top woke-ness or parody

        Yeah, I miss the 1970s when disaster movies limited the non-mainstream characters to the occasional nun, pregnant woman, or alcoholic priest.

        That would be an ecumenical matter!

        1. Synonymous Howard

          Re: Black mirror: it's either genuine over-the-top woke-ness or parody

          Careful now.

    3. ThomH

      Re: Black mirror: it's either genuine over-the-top woke-ness or parody

      OMG! An inter-racial couple?!? That'll show Thatcher!!!!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Black mirror: it's either genuine over-the-top woke-ness or parody

        [video is loud & contains swearing]

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILvd5buCEnU

        1. ThomH

          Re: Black mirror: it's either genuine over-the-top woke-ness or parody

          Loud and swearing is preferable to mired in the bigoted culture wars of 1973, so at least this conversation is on the upswing.

    4. SickSickSick

      Re: Black mirror: it's either genuine over-the-top woke-ness or parody

      Completely agree mate, it's exhausting

  5. Jason Bloomberg Silver badge
    Devil

    Sign here. Bring your own blood.

    That agreement seems comparable, even tame, compared to some of the 'we own your soul' releases I have signed as I have accumulated my fifteen minutes of fame. I have never enjoyed putting pen to such paper, having to quell the fear that I might one day 'go viral' for all the wrong reasons.

  6. abend0c4 Silver badge

    You Are Awful...

    ... but I like you.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vawBiuGHq1c

    Though not what Charlie had in mind, I suspect.

    1. Michael Strorm Silver badge

      Re: You Are Awful...

      I'd be incredibly surprised if Brooker *wasn't* already familiar with Dick Emery.

      If anything, I'd be surprised if it wasn't a tongue-in-cheek deliberate reference to him.

  7. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

    Size matters

    If you are too lazy to read the terms and conditions, at least check the length. If they are huge then you know it is so they can hide some nasties. The T&C's for porn services are often instructive. Their target market may well be in a hurry and distracted so they do not need to bother with length and they are one of the most innovative sectors on the internet. Last time I checked they detailed what would happen if you 'accidently' signed up twice for the same service: they take the money twice and keep all of it. Presumably you have to complete the Iliad twice to fully unsubscribe.

    1. Strahd Ivarius Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: Size matters

      users of a porn site not bothering with length?

      are you sure?

      1. big_D

        Re: Size matters

        It's not the size that matters, it's what you put in it (your T&Cs) that matters.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Size matters

          I think this discussion is veering more towards T&A than T&C...

  8. Pascal Monett Silver badge
    Stop

    "it is so easy to forget that terms and conditions are, in fact, a contract"

    No, they are not.

    A contract is a legally-binding accord by which two parties agree to a set of clauses that, in theory, should provide some sort of benefit to both. The importance of the words "legally-binding" is that one of the two parties cannot modify the terms of the contract without the other party's consent.

    Ts&Cs throw that last bit out the window. When you agree to the Ts&Cs, you have no right to modify them, nor do you have any right to refuse that the website, sole proprietor and manager of their content, modifies them as it suits the website.

    Ergo, Ts&Cs are most certainly not a contract. We need to find a better, more suitable qualifier. An extortion, parhaps ?

    1. ThatOne Silver badge
      Stop

      Re: "it is so easy to forget that terms and conditions are, in fact, a contract"

      Well, it's supposed to be a "take it or leave it" contract, not the type you negotiate: Either you agree, or there is a whole big world out there, go find some better offer.

      (I'm not making the apology of unrestricted capitalism, but one has to remain objective; else you have cases of people suing a pizza parlor for not serving seafood and other entitled abominations like that.)

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "it is so easy to forget that terms and conditions are, in fact, a contract"

      But if you've signed up to it, you've explicitly given your consent to them changing things.

      UK law can make certain Ts&Cs unenforceable, for example some car park disclaimers, but if the terms are legal and you sign, you've agreed to the contract. Deciding after the fact that you don't agree with them doesn't allow you to disregard the prior agreement.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "it is so easy to forget that terms and conditions are, in fact, a contract"

        ticking a box or clicking on an "I agree" button has no legal value.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "it is so easy to forget that terms and conditions are, in fact, a contract"

          Sorry, but that is misinformation. Courts across the United States have confirmed that clicking on a checkbox is akin to a signature on a written contract, and UK law takes the same position. Ask a lawyer (or Google it).

        2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          Re: "it is so easy to forget that terms and conditions are, in fact, a contract"

          https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/electronic-signatures-are-valid-confirms-law-commission/

          The common law in England and Wales has always been flexible in recognising a range of types of signature, including signing with an ‘X’, initials only, a printed name, or even a description of the signatory such as “Your loving mother”. The courts have considered electronic signatures on a number of occasions and have accepted electronic forms of signatures including a name typed at the bottom of an email or clicking an “I accept” tick box on a website.

      2. jmch Silver badge

        Re: "it is so easy to forget that terms and conditions are, in fact, a contract"

        "But if you've signed up to it, you've explicitly given your consent to them changing things."

        No, that is absolutely not the case, and unnotified changes are unenforceable*. Companies changing their T&Cs are required to inform you. If you actually read them and if you find something new that you don't like, you are free to cancel / leave. If you don't object, it's assumed you accept (that's the bit I don't really agree with). If you don't read them at all then that's on you.

        *Of course the chances of your finding the exact T&Cs you actually signed up for are remote unless they've been captured on the Internet Archive / wayback machine

        1. Martin-73 Silver badge

          Re: "it is so easy to forget that terms and conditions are, in fact, a contract"

          I still wonder what version of the paypal Ts and Cs I am bound to legally. I view my email in plain text only, but ebay keep sending notifications of change of terms with an empty text/plain section, despite my account being set to 'PLAIN TEXT ONLY' ... so i am bound by the utterly empty form they send, by continuing to use their services, I guess

      3. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

        Re: "it is so easy to forget that terms and conditions are, in fact, a contract"

        UK law can make certain Ts&Cs unenforceable

        I came this > <. close to having an argument with a checkout lady when she grandly informed me that they items I was buying were unreturnable.. (LSS - no they are not. UK law specifies that *anything* can be returned if it's broken/not fit for purpose/etc etc. The retailer is free to charge 'restocking fees' and the like but they are legally obliged to take back the items and either refund the money or, more likely, give a credit note.)

        As it is, the blinds are now up and past the return period anyway.

        1. Martin-73 Silver badge

          Re: "it is so easy to forget that terms and conditions are, in fact, a contract"

          Had a massive argument with tesco's over this, bought a tv via tesco online, picked up in a local store, opened it 3 weeks later (when ex's livingroom was decorated) to find obvious fork lift damage to the screen (the dents in the box were barely noticable till you KNEW)... the guy on tesco's online was really shitty about it and said i'd have to take them to court. The woman in the actual physical tesco's was listening in, gave him a piece of HER mind, and replaced the TV from THEIR stock (as their claim would be simple)

        2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: "it is so easy to forget that terms and conditions are, in fact, a contract"

          "UK law specifies that *anything* can be returned if it's broken/not fit for purpose/etc etc."

          That bit is true. I suspect the confusion was over buying something and returning it simply because you changed your mind and decided you didn't like the colour or something. Most places will take those sort of returns in many cases but AFAIK are not obliged too. If something is custom made, such as is often the case with window blinds, they are almost always classed a non-returnable unless there is a manufacturing defect. That's in-person purchases. Distance selling regulations are different.

  9. Admiral Grace Hopper

    "Alexa ..."

    "Tell me the clauses in the contract about invasion of privacy".

  10. thosrtanner

    But it's a work of fiction

    It's not like people would ever do that in the real world, is it?

    Oh wait - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/sep/29/londoners-wi-fi-security-herod-clause

    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      Re: But it's a work of fiction

      I could see some parents with boomerang children begging that company to exercise their rights under the Herod clause...

  11. wub

    Another cautionary tale.

    Humancentipad ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HumancentiPad )

    1. abs

      Re: Another cautionary tale.

      The same came to mind. Sometimes it feels like I've learned more from SP than school.

  12. fpx
    Devil

    Let's not forget that you not just have to read the T&C once. There is software (looking at you, Apple) that makes you re-agree to the new and improved T&Cs whenever you install a minor update.

    With software updates now coming at you pretty much round the clock, new T&Cs are essentially coming to you faster than you can read them.

    Amazing that this is legal.

    1. big_D

      In Germany, Apple lost a case about OS X not being usable on non-Apple products.

      The problem is, in Germany, the only T&Cs that are valid are those the user is aware of at the point of sale. As the T&Cs, including the one about using it exclusively on Apple branded products, were inside the shrink-wrapped packaging and therefore the purchaser could not be held to the terms and conditions they could only find out about, once they had paid for the package and removed the shrink-wrap.

      I believe Apple tried to argue, that the T&Cs were also on their website, but the court said that, as the website wasn't displayed to the customer at the point of sale, that was irrelevant.

      Obviously, OS X/macOS and most other software is delivered electronically these days.

      But, if the service provider changes the T&Cs, the customer/user has to agree to the changes, before they can be enforced, but they can't be enforced, and you can't stop the user using the service, if they don't agree to the changes, or you have to provide them with an immediate right to cancel the contract, without prejudice. This caught out WhatsApp and Facebook a few times, with new changes coming in, but large swathes of users refusing to accept the changes. In the end, they put in a deadline of accept or leave, if you didn't accept by the specified date, your account would be locked.

      1. fpx

        That may be true but does not apply to my point above, which was about updates. A software provider -- like Apple in this case -- is free to attach new T&Cs to an update. It's a bundle. You have the choice to accept the updated T&Cs and install the update, or to decline the update, in which case the prior T&Cs remain in effect.

        To use some more concrete examples, if you do not like Windows including more forced advertisement, you can remain with unsupported, vulnerable legacy versions. If you do not want to agree to new data collection terms and conditions with the latest WhatsApp update, you are free to remain with an earlier version -- that will be disconnected from the network in 30 days.

        See, you have a choice! Or not.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          "you can remain with unsupported, vulnerable legacy versions."

          Meanwhile, those older T&Cs allow MS to nag you every time you go online about using "unsupported and insecure" OS and exhorting you to upgrade.

    2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      "Amazing that this is legal."

      My bank is, I think, the only entity I deal with that tells me about changes to the Ts&Cs by sending a letter or email stating which clauses have changed, been removed or been added instead of the entire things. This may be covered by financial regulations, I wouldn't know, but it does make it abundantly clear what has changed, which is refreshing :-)

  13. scot stockwell
    Devil

    Insert soul here

    At least they stopped short of claiming irrevocable rights over the users 'spiritual intangibles'.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Insert soul here

      Don't give them ideas!

      (but how will they manage redheads?)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Insert soul here

        As a redhead I have to ask would we be able to decide which soul the had the rights to?

        Redhead have 1000's of souls, we steal them from non redheads

  14. Big_Boomer

    SHOW ME WHERE I SIGNED

    No, clicking on an OK button is NOT a signature, nor is a username/password. If they have an actual signature on real paper then they may, just may have half-a-leg to stand on. T&Cs are mostly unenforceable in a court of law, but can be used as a reason to refuse services or technical support. Like most people I gloss over most of them with the out-loud comment "Yes, yes, you can have my first-born" (I have no children!!) as they are mostly a waste of time. I feel the same about the endless "please accept our cookies" messages and other drivel that crooks and lawyers have forced upon the world. If any company was to include something like that in their T&Cs and use it, then the ensuing court case & publicity would pretty much guarantee their bankruptcy.

    1. jmch Silver badge

      Re: SHOW ME WHERE I SIGNED

      "clicking on an OK button is NOT a signature"

      I agree with your sentiment BUT, as has been pointed out by others already, clicking on an OK button is equivalent to a signature if (a) it's clear what you are clicking "OK" for, and (b) it's not otherwise illegal, or unenforceable due to a conflict with actual law.

      If, for example, you sign up for a service that has a monthly subscription and click OK, that is equivalent to a signature

      1. Martin-73 Silver badge

        Re: SHOW ME WHERE I SIGNED

        IF they can prove it's you. I am currently in a dispute with some US chain called 'whataburger' over my fees for deleting their emails. Someone signed up with my email address to get a promo or something (it's an easily guessable early gmail address)... I complained, so they deleted the account. Sadly this did not stop their whackjob email spam system, it just stopped the unsubscribe link from working.

        I am in the UK, they're in the US, but i'm sure if it gets bad enough the FTC or whoever will smack them hard

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: SHOW ME WHERE I SIGNED

          To be fair, they are pretty good burgers.

  15. This post has been deleted by its author

  16. Charlie Clark Silver badge

    No such thing as bad PR

    Win for Netflix, I reckon.

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: No such thing as bad PR

      Exactly. There may have been a 1500+% increase in searches for the T&Cs[1] but what's that an increase from? Normally it's 2 or 3 and now it's a few 1000? And how many understood the T&Cs and decided to cancel? Answer to that latter is likely zero or close enough not to be measurable :-)

      [1] Why? Surely it's linked from the bottom of every page, who can't find the Netflix site, especially if you are already a subscriber.

  17. Timto

    All your face are belong to us

    1. Martin-73 Silver badge

      They set us up the bum!

  18. Androgynous Cow Herd

    That disclaimer in the T&C

    with only slight modification is going to be my new corporate e-mail sig

  19. Tron Silver badge

    I hope El Reg checked my Ts and Cs.

    They are on my website. They apply to every entity that accepts me as a user.

    So, guys, go easy on the booze. I may need one of those kidneys one day.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like