Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

PayPal Denies Teen Reward For Finding Bug

timothy posted about a year ago | from the alice-in-wonderland-rules dept.

Bug 318

itwbennett writes "You have to be 18 to qualify for PayPal's bug bounty program, a minor detail that 17-year old Robert Kugler found out the hard way after being denied a reward for a website bug he reported. Curiously, the age guideline isn't in the terms and conditions posted on the PayPal website. Kugler was informed by email that he was disqualified because of his age."

cancel ×

318 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Paypal suck. (5, Insightful)

aliquis (678370) | about a year ago | (#43840127)

^ That's all.

Re:Paypal suck. (-1, Offtopic)

sneakyimp (1161443) | about a year ago | (#43840129)

Mod parent up.

Re:Paypal suck.CROOKS (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840177)

They're crooks.

Re:Paypal suck. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840267)

Also, itworld.com sucks... "page is loading", really, in 2013? Just say "look at this ad so we can earn enough money to do this", at least it'd be honest.

Re: Paypal suck. (1)

AvitarX (172628) | about a year ago | (#43840293)

/. Has spinny wheel loadings all the time now.

Re: Paypal suck. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840533)

Sure, but when the ad is orders of magnitude larger in file size to the content, it's more like "your ad is loading"....

Re: Paypal suck. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840721)

document.ready

Re:Paypal suck. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840793)

At least provide the link [paypalsucks.com] .

Re:Paypal suck. (0)

Penguinisto (415985) | about a year ago | (#43840853)

^ That's all.

You need to post that four times over, because it deserves at least 20 mod points...

Why don't businesses get it? (5, Insightful)

singingjim1 (1070652) | about a year ago | (#43840131)

That's a REALLY good way to generate positive publicity for your company - act like a douche.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (5, Insightful)

Mike Frett (2811077) | about a year ago | (#43840191)

Because the number of users whom don't care or didn't read this news is greater than the people that do. And they will continue to use the service no matter what.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (2)

jareth-0205 (525594) | about a year ago | (#43840273)

Who says this is the only report there will be? This is a human interest story that could quite easily be picked up wider than just /.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (3, Funny)

invid (163714) | about a year ago | (#43840923)

Only if it also involves a squirrel, a bikini model, and a trebuchet.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840327)

Because the number of users whom don't care

who don't care. Not 'whom'.

English is like a programming language. Don't use syntax if you don't understand it.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840381)

English is like a programming language.

No, it's not; not even clone. There is no need to be 100% precise and accurate with human languages because the message usually gets through anyway.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#43840747)

Not even clone?

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1)

JustOK (667959) | about a year ago | (#43840837)

What are you trying to say?

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840909)

There is no need to be 100% precise and accurate with human languages because the message usually gets through anyway.

Except when the message doesn't get through. [telegraph.co.uk]

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (-1, Troll)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year ago | (#43840629)

Never use 'whom', it is obsolete usage and a sure sign of a pretentious 'cork sniffing asshole' *.

To extend the analogy the final 'm' in 'whom' is like 'let' in basic or using a complete word in PHP.

* they show you the cork so you can 'look' at it, maybe squeeze it. The only reason anybody sniffs the cork is they have seen other monkeys sniffing the cork.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (0)

deoxyribonucleose (993319) | about a year ago | (#43840681)

Nonsense. Just because your contemporaries tend to avoid a word is no reason to abstain from it: that's the kind of narrow minded in-crowd attitude no true nerd should ever fall prey to. After all, the communication of the dead is tongued with fire beyond the language of the living.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1)

gv250 (897841) | about a year ago | (#43840915)

... no true nerd should ever fall prey to.

... to whom no true nerd should ever fall prey.

Just sayin'.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1)

gv250 (897841) | about a year ago | (#43840943)

... no true nerd should ever fall prey to.

... to which no true nerd should ever fall prey.

Just sayin'.

Oh crap.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840711)

Whom isn't obsolete. You seem to have not learned English.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840771)

No, it isn't obsolete and does matter. Try to get a book published if you're ignorant of grammar. Now, in a forum like this? If you're going to use "whom" you'd better be damned sure you're using it correctly or you'll look both pretentious and ignorant at the same time. Faux intellectuals are annoying. If you don't know when to use "whom" and when to use "who", just don't use "whom" at all. But don't expect anyone to believe you're ever stepped foot in a community college, let alone a university.

Leave "whom" to the pros, kid. If you're ignorant about a subject, STFU about it except for asking questions and listen. Nobody ever learned anything by spouting off shit they were ignorant about. Pretending to be more knowlegable than you actually are will leave you ignorant and leave everyone else laughing.

Redundent? (1, Offtopic)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about a year ago | (#43840799)

Isn't using the word in "pretentious" in pretentious 'cork sniffing asshole' redundant?

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (2)

hedwards (940851) | about a year ago | (#43840823)

It's not obsolete, it's just not necessary in many cases. But, if you're using it as the object of the preposition there's really no excuse not to use it. And sentences like "who hit who" are better when phrased as "who hit whom." The former requires more thinking than the latter.

Just because most people don't bother, doesn't mean that it's not worth the time. Granted, if you're using more complex sentences it can be ridiculous to diagram them in your head, but for more simple sentences it's not that hard.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840599)

Because the number of users whom don't care

That's "who", not "whom", Sparky.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1)

citizenr (871508) | about a year ago | (#43840879)

Somehow I dont think its users that will think twice about selling Paypal vuln to Russian mob instead of disclosing it through proper channels.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840919)

Because the number of users whom don't care or didn't read this news is greater than the people that do.

You see, in English, words actually have meaning as language constructs. I've noticed this is a minor issue that people raised with more prosaic languages have, as well as English speakers who have hopelessly dedicated themselves to pretending they were raised with such languages for reasons on which I don't wish to speculate in the space of this post. You can't just throw words around and assume you can redefine them on-the-fly for aesthetic concerns.

Take, for instance your use of the word "whom". As implied, this word has a meaning, and that meaning isn't "a set of glyphs used solely as linguistic seasoning in the form of a general drop-in replacement for the word 'who' that makes the writer or speaker look more sophisticated". In fact, in a truly delightful bout of irony, using it as such makes the writer or speaker look less sophisticated and more of a poseur, to the extent that such a concept exists in the world of English.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840261)

Businesses don't get it because there is no consequence for acting like a douche. People will continue to use PayPal. People will continue to buy Apple products. People will continue shopping at Wal-Mart. People will continue buying over-sized cars and going broke gassing them up.

What is there to get?

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (2)

singingjim1 (1070652) | about a year ago | (#43840467)

It's just poor form and doesn't instill confidence that any decent people are in charge of anything any more. It should be obvious that the right move would to not only give the guy his bounty, but to make sure they publicized that even though he's only 17 they are grateful that he came forward with the bug and are happy to show their appreciation. Why is this just not obvious anymore?

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43840483)

That's a REALLY good way to generate positive publicity for your company - act like a douche.

Payouts from just about any 'contest' style arrangement to under-18s tend to be legally obnoxious; but Paypal are a bunch of legendary assholes(and not mentioning such a salient limitation is a total dick move), so I'm not inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. I'm a bit surprised that they didn't just accuse him of hacking and then freeze and seize a few dozen random accounts...

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1)

sourcerror (1718066) | about a year ago | (#43840539)

They could have paid out to his parents too.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43840583)

Oh, they could have done any number of things that aren't "be a total asshole".

My point was merely that it is practically boilerplate for contests to have an "Applicants must be US residents 18 years or older" clause to keep legal complexity down, so that part of the story isn't too unexpected. It's just the not having that clause, and then springing it on him anyway, and not even trying to make amends in some other fashion, that is just classic Paypal... Merely forbidding under-18's, because they are a greater pain to deal with, is pretty normal.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1)

kpoole55 (1102793) | about a year ago | (#43840525)

Some companies don't care whether it's good publicity or bad publicity as long as it brings their name into the public eye.

Secret conditions (5, Insightful)

Geoffrey.landis (926948) | about a year ago | (#43840645)

So, basically, they have secret conditions to their offer to pay for revealing of bugs, and they don't tell anybody what those secret conditions are.

So, uh, why would anybody expect to be paid? What other secret conditions do they have, which they can reveal at any time and say "oh, so sorry, but one of our terms is that we don't pay under (xx) conditions."

--I'm sorry, but we don't pay if you work for a competitor, or a company that we deem might be a competitor in the future
--I'm sorry, but we don't pay if it's a vulnerability that can be traced to a flaw in an Adobe product, or in a commercial database program we may use that was purchased from an commercial source.
--I'm sorry, but we don't pay if you're from a country that doesn't speak English.
--I'm sorry, but we don't pay if the vulnerability is discovered by somebody from states with names beginning with a vowel.
--I'm sorry, but we don't pay if the vulnerability is one that is only active on days of the week ending in "y".

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1, Informative)

nospam007 (722110) | about a year ago | (#43840657)

"That's a REALLY good way to generate positive publicity for your company - act like a douche."

They are a bank and have to respect the law. No business with minors is one of them.
Just as alcohol or cigarette vendors they just cannot do business with kids.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (2)

slashmydots (2189826) | about a year ago | (#43840767)

Hey genius, it's a federal law actually.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1)

lightknight (213164) | about a year ago | (#43840851)

Nonsense. All publicity is good publicity. And think of all of the good publicity PayPal will receive in the future when the next time a bug like this is sold on the Russian bug exchange instead of sent directly to PayPal, resulting in thousands, possibly millions of dollars in losses.

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year ago | (#43840863)

I'm assuming there's no legal reason why one would need to be 18 to get paid for something like this? No child labor laws that apply in weird ways to where paypal would be classified as a sweatshop for one time giving money to someone who was 17? Just lawyers upholding the all holy all important important EULA at the expense of what's fair and what's good PR?

Re:Why don't businesses get it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840921)

Because if you don't like a rule you can whine about it until you get it bent just for you.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was a state law that set the 18 yr old limit.

Anyone ever been screwed by PayPal before? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840147)

Yup.

The next bug.... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840149)

So, the next time a 17yo finds a bug, they don't report it, the exploit it.

Sounds like a plan.

Paypal, perhaps all future underage rewards be in the form of scholarships?

Re:The next bug.... (3, Insightful)

click2005 (921437) | about a year ago | (#43840219)

If I was him, next time I'd setup a system where people could donate bitcoins. Once the total reached the target amount the exploit gets released with the largest donator getting to choose who it gets released to.

I could be worse. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840151)

PayPal could have paid into his parent's account, and then froze it.

Re:I could be worse. (1)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year ago | (#43840173)

They could freeze it until he's 18.

Re:I could be worse. (4, Insightful)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43840197)

or they could give it to his guardian or parents, or at least ask him to name a charity for it to be donated. In short, a dozen ways they could award the money if they weren't cheap-asses, and used their brain a little.

Re:I could be worse. (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#43840317)

They could freeze it until he's 18

This.

or they could give it to his guardian or parents

Or this.

In fact, by expecting children to do something for free that adults would get paid to do, I'm wondering if it might even run afoul of child slavery laws.

Re:I could be worse. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840365)

naw.

In the USA, if you put it in a click-through TOS then it's legal. Even in this case, where the comeback is basically "but but but it was SUPPOSED to be there" they can get away with it. The corporations basically write the laws when it comes to legaleeze and through their congressional sock puppets in the USA. That's why we are about to self destruct here.

Re:I could be worse. (0)

skywire (469351) | about a year ago | (#43840223)

Mod Parent Funny!!!

Re:I could be worse. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840501)

Why give him any money at all, in trust or not, when their policies have already given them the bug fix for free?

Start thinking like them and you'll figure it out.

This is also why I don't sell on eBay any longer. Paypal allows personal transactions with no fee (or used to). Many transactions on eBay were paid with Paypal. Paypal bought eBay, or the other way 'round, it doesn't matter, and now all but a very few transactions on eBay must be done with Paypal commercial accounts so that eBay gets their posting fees and Paypal gets their transactions fees. Sounds to me like double dipping since they're both putting their money in the same pocket now.

Just give the kid his money (5, Insightful)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about a year ago | (#43840153)

I'm pretty sure most shareholders would rather you part with tiny sum of money that you owe this kid than to take the tsunami of bad PR and bad faith that would result in you being dicks about it.

Then again, kid is already getting paid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840313)

... in the PR from this, worth more than whatever money PayPay would have given him.

If I was PayPal, I'd offer the kid an internship or something. That is, an internship where I work him to the death and squeeze as much as possible for as little pay as possible. But hey, I'll coerce him to stay quiet and tell him how he'd never have gotten such a wonderful ::snicker:: opportunity otherwise.

Re:Just give the kid his money (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840353)

It's paypal, the tsunami has been building for 15 years, it's never hit shore yet.

Re:Just give the kid his money (2)

cdrudge (68377) | about a year ago | (#43840875)

Shareholders don't give a crap. The number of people who won't use Paypal because of this isn't even a blip on their financial impact radar, causing even less of a blip on eBay's stock price.

Briliant. (5, Insightful)

headhot (137860) | about a year ago | (#43840171)

Way to piss off the community you asked to hack your system. I'm sure this will go well.

Re:Briliant. (1)

hierophanta (1345511) | about a year ago | (#43840569)

my thoughts exactly. time to grab the popcorn

PayPal will screw you any way it can... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840179)

Be it closing your account, taking your money, refusing to pay up, if there's a way to screw you over PayPal will find it.

Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840183)

Why do people try to help corporations for FREE? Its appears most of them only care about making money and saving face, not the social good or their employees. As such they find every way to make more money (Or avoid spending money) at the expense of society and their employees.

Let this be a Lesson (5, Insightful)

bengoerz (581218) | about a year ago | (#43840199)

If Paypal won't pay the kid for bugs in its system, I bet someone else will.

Re:Let this be a Lesson (2)

minstrelmike (1602771) | about a year ago | (#43840323)

If Paypal won't pay the kid for bugs in its system, I bet someone else will.

Seems to me that's the entire reason for having a bounty program in the first place.
Then they dump it because the legal hassle of paying an under-age worker is too difficult.
Way to strategize.

Re:Let this be a Lesson (1)

bhlowe (1803290) | about a year ago | (#43840455)

I bet this kid already has the money and an apology from PayPal. If not now, within the hour.

HaHa (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840215)

We got work out of you. And don't have to pay you.

Why? because fuck you that's why!

Re:HaHa (0)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#43840829)

If you don't smoke Tarrlytons... Fuck you!

They could have placed it in a college scholarship (4, Insightful)

Picass0 (147474) | about a year ago | (#43840229)

"Here's a few bucks in a bank account for next year when you go to school!" Oh, no. They didn't think of that. Creeps.

Re:They could have placed it in a college scholars (1)

ottothecow (600101) | about a year ago | (#43840295)

Hell, they could have placed it in a paypal acount. "Here's a few bucks in a paypal account that you can use next year to buy hundreds of dollars of textbooks on half.com"

Re:They could have placed it in a college scholars (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840415)

Placing it in a PayPal account pretty much ensures he would've never seen his money. This is PayPal. They'd grant the money, find it suspicious, then freeze the account for years.

Re:They could have placed it in a college scholars (3, Insightful)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#43840557)

While I can appreciate where your skepticism is coming from, you have to realize that Paypal freezing people's accounts is actually not a typical thing. For every person that this sort of thing happens to, there are many hundreds or thousands of others that it does not. Not that I'm saying that it happens at all is acceptable, but it's not statistically valid to assume that something which happens a tiny fraction of 1% of the time might be sufficient reason to believe that one should actually be actively *expecting* it to happen at any particular time.

Re:They could have placed it in a college scholars (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840729)

It happens enough that smart people don't keep money in their PayPal account any longer than they have to.

Re:They could have placed it in a college scholars (1)

JWW (79176) | about a year ago | (#43840671)

Hell, they could just award the amount to him it the form of a scholarship.

Most kids turn are 18 before starting college.

Then it would be up to him to use the money or not by attending college.

But Paypal would come out of it looking much much more reasonable.

Perverse incentive (5, Insightful)

wanderfowl (2534492) | about a year ago | (#43840241)

"Remember kids: If you find a bug in Paypal's system, you'll get paid more for selling it to the black hats."

Lunacy only PayPal Lawyers could Love (1)

skywire (469351) | about a year ago | (#43840271)

Sometimes it's hard not to think Dick had it right in Henry the Sixth.

curiously enough (0)

nimbius (983462) | about a year ago | (#43840325)

You meet and exceed all qualifications for our bug bounty, Mr. Kugler, and we thank you for your participatory effort and hacker spirit. in the spirit of our ethos, we would certainly not be forgiven if we were remiss in this congratulation, and we certainly have not forgotten about the security of the internet. to ensure your reward is provided quickly and safely, we must insist upon our currency the Bitcoin.

All the best,
Anonymous.

Not paying? Is it for legal reasons? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840339)

I am curious if they chose not to pay due to some kind of underage worker laws or some such? Not trying to make excuses for what clearly could have been handled in a much better fashion (the scholarship suggestion was a good one!), but ... I am curious about the motives, here.

Re:Not paying? Is it for legal reasons? (1)

Ruprecht the Monkeyb (680597) | about a year ago | (#43840351)

Almost assuredly. Every contest no matter how trivial has 'Must be 18 years old to enter' in the fine print.

Re:Not paying? Is it for legal reasons? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840391)

What about the girl who won the hackathon [slashdot.org] ?

Re:Not paying? Is it for legal reasons? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840573)

It is legal to employ 15 year olds in Germany. There are some restrictions, but none that would apply here. Paypal is just continuing their business plan, which is to keep as much money as possible for themselves with no recourse for anyone whom they wrong.

PayPal did the kid a favor (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840341)

He'll get a nice publicity boost. Seventy years from now or whenever, this incident will be in the kid's obituary.

Re:PayPal did the kid a favor (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#43840409)

Yeah hopefully he can get a nice job from the publicity. If it was a 5-digit prize that could be a life-changing amount of money for a Gen. Y'er.

Legal action (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840357)

Deceptive Trade Practices, Selling a Fraud, and a number of other charges I can think of against paypal. He needs an attorney.

Lame... (1)

PortHaven (242123) | about a year ago | (#43840369)

Okay, so they have the rules. But seriously, they could still cut the kid a check as a "Hey cool, nice job kid."

So they are going to do the right thing right? (3, Insightful)

Marrow (195242) | about a year ago | (#43840375)

And hold the money for him until he is 18? And then give it to him. That would satisfy their policies wouldnt it?

Re:So they are going to do the right thing right? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840617)

PayPal are more likely to keep it until he is 18 and then set fire to it in front of him just because they can. Robert Kugler has learned a valuable lesson: PayPal are massive assholes and should be completely avoided. At least it didn't cost him a large frozen account balance.

Probably legal, so instead award a scholarship (1)

WillAdams (45638) | about a year ago | (#43840377)

targeted specifically to the kid in question.

Re:Probably legal, so instead award a scholarship (1)

anthony_greer (2623521) | about a year ago | (#43840707)

Fuck the scholarship - Why should the kid be forced to spend that rewarrd cash on education? Hell, a kid with skills like that can get a great job without college more than likely!

give it to his guardian (1)

santiam (1279644) | about a year ago | (#43840437)

Have him choose a parent or guardian. That way they aren't jerks and they don't have to set up a brand-new scholarship program.

They could have been bigger about this (1)

erroneus (253617) | about a year ago | (#43840445)

You know? Like setting up some sort of thing that contributes to a school account or something? That's pretty damned low.

Why? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840509)

What's the purpose of this 'over 18' rule anyway? I would think that if a kid was able to hack my website, I should be paying them more for the embarrassment factor.

Not how contracts work... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840521)

That's generally not how contracts work. Entering into a contract with a minor means that the contract generally is unenforceable against the minor. However, it's still binding on the other party.

Since we all know that the terms and conditions on a website are legally binding, his lawsuit should be pretty straightforward.

Feel free to contact me, kid. I'll gladly represent you.

Dear Kid, (2)

dlb (17444) | about a year ago | (#43840529)

Welcome to the real world.

Too young for what ? (4, Interesting)

Alain Williams (2972) | about a year ago | (#43840543)

If he is too young to receive money for finding a bug, is he also too young to be criminally prosecuted for exploiting a bug ?

Re:Too young for what ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840659)

Too Young only applies to good things.
You could get tried as an adult for doing it even though you're twelve, because "oh no scary cyberterrorism will explode our computers through the tubes".

Just like you're too young to drink at 18, but more than old enough to lose a leg to IEDs for a country that doesn't want you in a country that didn't want you there.
Too young to not pay double or triple the insurance rates, but too old for "kids eat free".

They never learn (2)

Reliable Windmill (2932227) | about a year ago | (#43840567)

I wonder when big companies will learn that douchery like this always comes back to bite. Are you unaware of the Internet? You can't get away with it!

Paypal did him a favor (2)

Diddlbiker (1022703) | about a year ago | (#43840575)

For a few hundred bucks, the kid learned some valuable lessons that will last a lifetime. That's less than $1 per month.
  • Paypal will fuck you over
  • In fact, large corporations will
  • And so will anyone else
  • Learn to read the fine print

Where's the story? (4, Informative)

pongo000 (97357) | about a year ago | (#43840587)

FTFA:

PayPal requires that those reporting bugs have a verified PayPal account.

The kid didn't have one. Claim denied. What's the story here? (The age thing? That's irrelevant...)

Re:Where's the story? (2)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#43840805)

Shut uuuup. You're spoiling it.

How to turn a white hat against you (2)

rs1n (1867908) | about a year ago | (#43840589)

Paypal is really stupid -- I would not be surprised if this actually results in the guy finding more bugs and simply just releasing the information without giving Paypal any heads up about it.

Normal US procedures (2, Interesting)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about a year ago | (#43840593)

Welcome, Mr. Kugler, to the good ol' US-of-A, where you aren't a real person until you can cast a ballot. If you get a job, you must follow a different set of rules. If you break a law, you get a different justice system. If you win a contest, you have a different set of rules that forbid you from winning anything. That's right, in several states you can't actually own property until you're 18. I'm not sure what jurisdiction PayPal/eBay is playing ball in, but in general, don't expect the government to ever side with anyone who hasn't reached that magical moment where they are instantly freed from their childhood stupidity.

You see, despite biology saying that humans are mature at around 15 years, the Puritans who founded the United States were rather squeamish about things like youthful ambition, political activism, and worst of all, sex. The generally-accepted age of maturity moved back several years, finally settling at 18, and it's been stuck there. Of course, anyone under 18 who wants to have their full rights doesn't have the right to get them (except through a red-tape-filled emancipation process), and no parents ever want their darling little children to grow up so fast, and no politician would dare propose an affront to "traditional family values", so there are no realistic attempts to get more legal power for minors.

A few states allow certain adult rights to 16- and 17-year-olds, but those rights are usually restricted to things like "can work on a farm" and "can be prosecuted as an adult for heinous crimes". Practically all other rights are the domain of the parents, so there's a slim chance that your parents could ask for the reward as promised, but that's unlikely to work, because they didn't find the bug.

Welcome, sir, to America, where our child abuse is civilized!

Sue them... (1)

anthony_greer (2623521) | about a year ago | (#43840683)

Depending on the amount and the state of residence this may be a small claims court case, in which case it would be a slam dunk - and if you do have to go to real court, get the EFF to provide council - thats why they exist...

Arschloch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43840877)

Paypal ist ein arschloch. Die Junge will kein geld haben. Paypal soll gibt ihn seine Anerkennung.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>