Rule 6

It doesn't really effect me because im not intending to delete my account but i was looking though the rules and

In the US, all websites are required to have both a toll-free number and an online process to request account deletion or personal information erasure. As noted earlier, sites don't have to comply with the account deletion request, but they do have to at least anonymize or de-identify your information in that account. A number of states have passed state laws to similar and greater effect.

On top of that given that this website also has EU accounts it also falls under the right to be forgot law (GDPR) which can come with some pretty harsh fines.
Maybe yall have already worked something out legally to cover yourselfs or im misinterpreting something but its something you may want to look into.

 

Forum posts aren't PII (Personally identifying information). Forums aren't publishers of the data. In neither US law now EU law applies in this situation.

People should not be posting their own personal information carelessly, and even if they do, it is not QQ's legal responsibility. The ability for people to edit their own posts is enough.

 

Perhaps im misinterpreting the rule then QQ will delete someones account if they are asked which can have personal information on them. The rule is just saying they wont delete peoples posts is that correct?

 

You can edit your posts to delete info. QQ will not delete accounts. There is no Personal information in accounts.

Laws care about things like name and address and phone numbers, purchase history, links you click... QQ doesn't store that.

 

I mean thats not how that works. I dont think it will matter untill it does though so big shrug yall do you.

 

The EU might consider tehelgee within their jurisdiction on account of EU posters existing, but it's not at all clear how they'd actually punish him for ignoring that law. He AFAIK has no assets there for them to seize, and they cannot imprison him unless the USA chooses to extradite. They could maybe cut off donations from EU residents, but that's it.

Big-tech companies follow the GDPR because they do business in the EU and the loss from being unable to continue that business (and/or having their local assets and personnel seized) exceeds the loss from complying with the law. This is also why movie companies don't say anything bad about Xi Jinping; they want to keep access to the Chinese market. But I can say all the bad things I want about Xi Jinping, because he can't actually do anything about it - I don't live there (and don't intend to visit), I don't live somewhere that will extradite, and I don't have any assets in the PRC that could be seized or any ongoing business there that could be interrupted. Foreign laws are only binding to the degree that said foreign country can actually punish you for breaking them.

EDIT: Another example of people going "do your worst" is the various copyright-violation sites hosted in Russia. Those sites can exist because the USA has no way to hurt them; their principals are not in the West and none of their servers are in the US, and Russia refuses to enforce Western copyrights against them. So beyond shaking fists angrily, the copyright holders are helpless.

 

There's also the Terms of Service, which I'm fairly sure by agreeing to you waive your right to having any official and legally binding say over what happens to information you grant to the site.

 

Governments know about contracts of adhesion forcing the inferior party to waive rights; they've been around a long time now. Most modern consumer-protection laws state that the rights involved can't be waived, and in some cases go further and criminalise telling people that they've waived the unwaivable rights (Steam got fined for this in Australia; even telling people (falsely) that they're not entitled to refunds in the case of nonfunctional goods*, as Steam originally did, is itself illegal in Australia).

I'm pretty confident the GDPR rights can't be waived, else they'd have been useless against Google/Facebook, but IANAL and don't know the details.

*I know there are some exceptions to "you must refund", but I don't know exactly what they are; IANAL.

 

...So, I went digging and came up with a whole bunch of points of varying relevance. Then I tossed most of them, thanks to comparing some shit.

So. The ToS and Privacy Policy say that you can request for your account to be deleted - but Rule Six says that the answer will be 'no' by default.

The ToS does qualify both 'can ask' and 'won't receive', though. Namely: the word 'request' (used in all three sources), and the phrase 'undertaken at our own discretion'.
---> 'Requests' are not 'Requirements'. 'Requirements' would cover things like DMCA takedown notices. Stretch a point, and it would also no doubt cover official GDPR/CPRA/whatever erasure directions.
---> We can't make QQ('s owner and/or staff) do shit. We can, under certain circumstances, convince them that shit needs to get done - at which point they do shit on their own recognisance that may or may not match what you asked for in some or all particulars. (Weasel-ish, but what did you expect out of a ToS?)


...Mind you, all this is about account erasure. You can delete the contents of your own posts in unlocked threads. You can request a name-change, which will usually be honoured. You can also approach QQ staff for help in erasing specific posts in locked threads and/or replies to the information you're worried about. Basically there are a lot of things you can do short of account deletion.

(Oh - and there's nothing stopping QQ from keeping an IP on file, as long as it's kept confidential. If nothing else, they need to keep a record of the request/direction itself. And if that happens to allow them to recognise an IP should the former account-holder ever come back to try damaging the site... well, then that's just a happy accident innit?)