Hacker News Reader

Can you enlighten us what is so disgusting about this in your opinion, this seems to be a straight forward agreement to use the content provided to Google. Not worse than any other EULA I've read.

Not so, say those in the know: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/24/notice_and_shakedown...

That article seems entirely based on the comments on the OP. The only major quote in there is from a comment by the publisher of the post.

And it's wrong about its two major points, as other commenters pointed out: the contract doesn't limit "windowing", and the "covenant not to sue" just covers suing over copyright infringement for exactly what's covered in the contract itself.

If you want people to take you seriously, never cite The Register.

And in particular, citing them as "in the know" (as hilarious as it may be to do so).

Text as image. I know, right?

Quite as usual, you should expect them back away from this deal and soften it a lot in case it gets massive public attention and criticism. They have competitors, and those will not fail to use this moment.

Can you elaborate?