techdirt has stopped short of covering a much larger issue this story points to which is that KlearGear has shown how little the TRUSTe program does to protect the privacy of online shoppers.
According to TRUSTe, a website displaying the TRUSTe seal must provide and *follow* a stated privacy policy. When you review all the other facts, it is clear that KlearGear did not honor it's own privacy policy.
Consider the following:
(1) The person making the purchase did not agree to the June 2012 Terms of Sale and Use, they agreed to the Terms of Sale and Use at the time of purchase.
(2) The person making the post (his wife) did not agree to the Terms of Sale and Use as she did not make the purchase.
(3) KlearGear started displaying the TRUSTe seal around Janurary of 2012.
(4) KlearGear started providing notice of the $3,500 legal fee after April 2012 (after use of the TRUSTe seal had already started).
The basis for the fee would be if Mr. Palmer agreed to the terms of the fee and also had taken action in violation of the terms. However, we know those terms where not provided at the time of purchase and he wasn't the one that submitted the post. Hence, not only is the fee invalid, but by KlearGear providing personally identifiable information to a third-party (the collection agency), KlearGear had violated the published privacy policy. KlearGear continues to use the TRUSTe seal even today on it's website.
Normally, this should mean TRUSTe will "resolve" the privacy dispute through their feedback system. However, this situation is even worse and only goes to further highlight how useless the TRUSTe seal is--Kleargear.com does not even appear in the TRUSTe directory of companies authorized to use the seal! While the image search website tineye.com makes it easy to find Kleargear.com's use of the seal along with that KG has used it for almost 2 years, TRUSTe has done nothing to enforce it's trademark. There is no sign of an pro-active step taken by TRUSTe to address either use of the seal or violation of privacy policy. Instead, TRUSTe has published "TRUSTe Alert" asking people to file a report. But to fill out the fields of the report, you must first have a piracy dispute with the company. Simply misuse of the seal is not enough.
techdirt really should be investigating TRUSTe as part of this article. Why didn't use of the TRUSTe seal protect Mr. Palmer's private information from being disclosed to the collection agency when the fee was never agreed to? Why is KG able to use the seal for nearly two years without being part of the TRUSTe directory? What is TRUSTe doing *pro-actively* to keep situations like this from taking place? Why should anyone trust a website that has the TRUSTe seal anymore than they should "trust" KG?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by chilinux.
TRUSTe fails us yet again!
According to TRUSTe, a website displaying the TRUSTe seal must provide and *follow* a stated privacy policy. When you review all the other facts, it is clear that KlearGear did not honor it's own privacy policy.
Consider the following:
(1) The person making the purchase did not agree to the June 2012 Terms of Sale and Use, they agreed to the Terms of Sale and Use at the time of purchase.
(2) The person making the post (his wife) did not agree to the Terms of Sale and Use as she did not make the purchase.
(3) KlearGear started displaying the TRUSTe seal around Janurary of 2012.
(4) KlearGear started providing notice of the $3,500 legal fee after April 2012 (after use of the TRUSTe seal had already started).
The basis for the fee would be if Mr. Palmer agreed to the terms of the fee and also had taken action in violation of the terms. However, we know those terms where not provided at the time of purchase and he wasn't the one that submitted the post. Hence, not only is the fee invalid, but by KlearGear providing personally identifiable information to a third-party (the collection agency), KlearGear had violated the published privacy policy. KlearGear continues to use the TRUSTe seal even today on it's website.
Normally, this should mean TRUSTe will "resolve" the privacy dispute through their feedback system. However, this situation is even worse and only goes to further highlight how useless the TRUSTe seal is--Kleargear.com does not even appear in the TRUSTe directory of companies authorized to use the seal! While the image search website tineye.com makes it easy to find Kleargear.com's use of the seal along with that KG has used it for almost 2 years, TRUSTe has done nothing to enforce it's trademark. There is no sign of an pro-active step taken by TRUSTe to address either use of the seal or violation of privacy policy. Instead, TRUSTe has published "TRUSTe Alert" asking people to file a report. But to fill out the fields of the report, you must first have a piracy dispute with the company. Simply misuse of the seal is not enough.
techdirt really should be investigating TRUSTe as part of this article. Why didn't use of the TRUSTe seal protect Mr. Palmer's private information from being disclosed to the collection agency when the fee was never agreed to? Why is KG able to use the seal for nearly two years without being part of the TRUSTe directory? What is TRUSTe doing *pro-actively* to keep situations like this from taking place? Why should anyone trust a website that has the TRUSTe seal anymore than they should "trust" KG?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by chilinux.
Submit a story now.