David Stebbins, who has previously demanded $600 billion from Wal-Mart, claiming they entered into a contract with him by responding to an email, has now filed a motion to force Google to pay him $500 billion.
Stebbins claims to have amended YouTube's Terms Of Service (TOS), requiring them to either terminate his account within 30 days or pay him $500 billion. He says those same TOS allow him to do so:
So what were his amendments? Most of them aren't clear in the filing, having been redacted by scribbling over them with a pen.
However, he did leave a portion untouched which he claims entitles him to binding arbitration or, if Google fails to respond to an arbitration request within 24 hours, automatic judgement in his favor.
He explains this in his motion:
Read the entire filing below.
Paragraph B of Section 1 of these terms state that the terms can be unilaterally modified at any time. If the other party does not wish to accept the new terms, they may sever the contractual relationship.
On March 22, 2011, I took Youtube up on that generous offer and sent them an email announcing my own modifications to the Youtube terms of service.
Paragraph B of Section 1 of these terms state that the terms can be unilaterally modified at any time. If the other party does not wish to accept the new terms, they may sever the contractual relationship.
So what were his amendments? Most of them aren't clear in the filing, having been redacted by scribbling over them with a pen.
However, he did leave a portion untouched which he claims entitles him to binding arbitration or, if Google fails to respond to an arbitration request within 24 hours, automatic judgement in his favor.
He explains this in his motion:
If I send them an invitation to arbitrate a claim, and they do not accept this invitation within 24 hours of receiving it, I automatically win. I do not even have to go to arbitrationand invoke Rule 36 of the National Arbitraation Forum Code of Procedure; I just... win... period.
Read the entire filing below.
