Forum Discussion
TheEndless
11 years agoRoku Guru
"EnTerr" wrote:"TheEndless" wrote:"mtoto" wrote:
2. Roku may cease distributing the Channel Application ... if roku has reason to believe that such action is prudent or necessary.
Combined with the preceding clause this seems fatal. Why would I, or anyone else, invest in an application if roku can just remove it if they decide to compete with it directly or via a partner or even just for ransom?
That's a rather extreme interpretation of that clause. They're just saying they reserve the right to pull the channel if it violates Roku's terms or DMCA. There's nothing to suggest they would pull your channel because they want to compete with it.
Heh, that's not what they said. If they wanted to say "if it violates Roku's terms or DMCA", they would have said it. Instead it says "if ... such action is prudent". "Prudent" being "Careful in regard to one's own interests; provident", that's a much broader "as they see fit".
I don't think this is unique to RokuCo though - e.g. Apple yanks apps from AppStore as they please, with no right to defend it in a formal hearing.
Regardless of how you interpret it, it's just them covering their collective butts. If they didn't reserve the right to pull a channel, they could get into some pretty nasty legal issues should a legitimate need arise. Wording it loosely allows some wiggle room for it to cover previously unforeseen scenarios.
Either way, I stand by my assertion that mtoto's is an extreme interpretation.