I've unsubscribed to their platform. I give them a couple of months and then they can close their business.
Photos & Videos Yummyzine
- Thread starter Candydandyboys
- Start date
- NPTH,
Reluctantly, I won't be renewing my subscription either. If the terms and conditions change and are less scary, I'd be happy to come back (also because I'd like to buy the final part of Jahly's video, but for now I have to break away from Yummy).
Wait until they release the latest super hot guy! Everyone will sign anything and give up their entire life savings just to see some dick. It’s stronger than you, completely irrational! That’s what happens when the dick is doing the thinking. 
Interesting that the stooge yummyzine account posting here claims they couldn't develop a system to reward coins based on loyalty, yet they CAN institute an anti piracy clause based on vibes?
Luke_Conde
Sexy Member
Are you for real ?Wait until they release the latest super hot guy! Everyone will sign anything and give up their entire life savings just to see some dick. It’s stronger than you, completely irrational! That’s what happens when the dick is doing the thinking.
Okay, so now I can't watch the videos unless I sign the documents. It's practically extortion because this should have come up when I paid for the 6-month renewal a few days ago, but no, they let you pay and then give you these documents, and if you don't sign them, you lose your subscription.
I think you prob still have access to it otherwise what they are doing is illegal. They can forbid you purchasing new videos if you don’t sign new NDA but there’s no legal ground that they deny your access to purchased content
I genuinely can’t tell whether you’re serious or just looking for something to complain about. If updating terms of service was extortion, half the internet would be in prison by now.
This is a pretty standard practice used by virtually every major online platform. Instagram updates its terms. Facebook updates its terms. YouTube updates its terms. Streaming services update their terms. Software companies update their terms. If you want to continue using the service, you accept the new terms or stop using it.
Not liking a company’s decision doesn’t automatically make it a crime. Whether someone likes the new terms is a completely different discussion, but that’s generally a consumer or contractual matter, not a criminal one.
Sometimes people throw around legal buzzwords without understanding what they actually mean. Anyway, Bless you.
Every time Yummy changes something, people start acting as if they’re witnessing the crime of the century. Updating Terms of Service is something virtually every online platform does.
And let’s be serious for a moment: accepting updated terms is not “waiving the presumption of innocence.” Nobody is accusing you of a crime. Nobody is dragging you into court. They’re updating the rules of a private platform.
As for the “$150,000 invoice” argument, you’re presenting it as if Yummy can wake up one morning, point at a random member and send them a bill because they have a bad feeling. That’s obviously not how contracts or legal systems work and would be simply impossible.
You don’t have to like every change they make. I don’t agree with all of them either. But calling standard terms updates “extortion” and claiming your fundamental rights are being abolished is just unnecessary drama.
Did you tread their T&C? Thats exactly what they can do. They charge you and it is up to you to fight for yourself afterwards. Noone else (Meta, Google, Apple) does this. Their conditions are "proven guilty until we may decide not guilty." Are your from their PR team?
yeah, thats exactly the problem. They should take their claim to court and the independent court should decide on their claim. They are skipping the court and making themselves rule as the court.
Ask them for a refund cause these weren't the terms when you bought it
If they don't refund you take it up with your bank and dispute the charge. They are gonna get you back your money
Well, let me correct you. With their terms, they're reversing the burden of proof. What does that mean? In any litigation, the accuser must bear the burden of proof and demonstrate the defendant's guilt. That's the presumption of innocence, a basic right. They're making the defendant responsible for proving their innocence against any accusation, which is illogical, because you'd have to start from the premise that the defendant is guilty from the beginning until proven otherwise.
To make matters worse, they literally state that you can't sue them, but that any problem must be resolved before an independent arbitrator, outside the judicial system. Who chooses this arbitrator? It's not in the contract, but they can still sue you.
The platforms update their terms and conditions regularly, but they notify you, and you can agree or disagree and stop using their platform. However, this applies to free platforms. When you make a purchase, you accept the terms at the moment you pay. If you agree, you pay; if you don't agree, you don't pay. They can't make you sign something after you pay, and if you refuse, you lose your money. Even worse, they clearly state that they can change the terms without notifying you, so it's our responsibility to review them periodically.
Finally, your devotion to defending them is quite incredible, even if what they do goes against the interests of the customer, which you supposedly are, though I doubt it. Either you were somehow connected to them, you're a bit slow, or your erections are simply preventing blood and oxygen from reaching your brain.
You're confusing criminal law, civil law, and contractual disputes.
The presumption of innocence is a fundamental principle in criminal proceedings. A Terms of Service agreement between a private company and its users is not a criminal trial. Companies include all sorts of clauses regarding account suspensions, arbitration, chargebacks, leaks, piracy, damages, etc. Whether every clause would ultimately be enforceable is a separate question that would be decided if challenged and EU and UK courts are strongly pro consumer.
Likewise, arbitration clauses are extremely common. Many companies use them. You may dislike them, and some jurisdictions limit their scope, but their mere existence does not mean your rights have disappeared.
As for changes to terms, the real question is not whether a company can update them, they obviously can. The question is whether a specific clause is enforceable and whether it complies with applicable consumer law. Those are legal questions that would require a court or regulator to answer, not assumptions based on the most extreme interpretation of the wording.
Finally, the fact that someone disagrees with your legal analysis does not make them part of a PR team. It's entirely possible for two customers to read the same document and come to different conclusions. Resorting to personal insults about intelligence is usually a sign that your legal argument is running out of steam.
Finally, someone wise! That’s probably the most sensible course of action. If you believe their new terms are unacceptable, and you can no longer use the service you paid for, just ask for a refund and explain your reasons.
If someone believes they have been treated unfairly, they should pursue a refund or consumer dispute. That’s a far more realistic path than talking about extortion, criminal complaints, or nonsense conspiracy theories.
New communicate show on the site, we have only 5 days to sign NDA, after deadline Access will be restricted!!! Which means we will lose access to our purchases unless we sign this pact with the devil, and live with fear with paying them 150 000$ someday
I've been wanting to cancel for a bit now, but there's no way to get the videos we paid for with cancellation I assume. I feel like I should at least be granted access to the ones I paid for even without a subscription.
The way these bitches are actively fucking with their subscribers. Thank God I cancelled my subscription. 
Dilma Rousseff
Loved Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2017
- Posts
- 202
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 534
- Points
- 213
- Location
- Toronto, ON, Canada
- Sexuality
- 69% Gay, 31% Straight
how are they going to charge 150k to someone's credit card lol? that's way beyond my limit
Similar threads
