Brilliant: Difference between revisions

Line 42:

===Site content===

Under the Site Content section, Brilliant lays out what is considered "fair use" of their content. This has the potential for abuse as their definition of "Content" includes anything that Brilliant has on their website or sends to you directly. This could include lessons or other media they provide to you, but also includes logos, their name, or virtually anything known publicly about the company that they provide on their website, and in the terms specifically state that "public display" and "publicly perform" are included. This could be potentially leveraged as a way to use copyright to suppress sharing information and user reviews, as the only way to use their "content" is with express written permission<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brilliant |date=2025-07-14 |title=Terms of Use |url=https://brilliant.org/terms-of-use/ |url-status=live}}</ref>. <blockquote>User agrees that all content and materials (collectively, "Content") delivered via the Service or otherwise made available by Brilliant at the Site are protected by copyrights, trademarks, service marks, patents, trade secrets or other proprietary rights and laws. Except as expressly authorized by Brilliant in writing, User agrees not to sell, license, rent, modify, distribute, copy, reproduce, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, publish, adapt, edit or create derivative works from such materials or content. Reproducing, copying or distributing any content, materials or design elements on the Site for any purpose is strictly prohibited without the express prior written permission of Brilliant.</blockquote>When searching for dissenting opinions about Brilliant on YouTube reviews do come up, however finding sources with no incentives to lean one way or another was difficult. Many videos by various creators come up, but most made it clear in the descriptions of the videos that they were sponsored by Brilliant or gave softball criticisms that were walked back. One video by Wiggle was the only truly negative review that was found, but as of writing this he has 787 subscribers, so it is unclear if this video would have garnished enough attention to be noticed by Brilliant's legal team. Wiggle goes on to say that "the idea is not to teach anything, but make you feel like you're learning a lot"<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wiggle |date=2024-08-09 |title=Is Brilliant.org A Scam? |url=https://youtu.be/mzNYsPuEsRI?si=FF0mr0kTsuC0qAQ- |access-date=2025-07-14 |website=YouTube}}</ref>, a far more critical statement than any other videos reviewed. It is also worth noting that most videos reviewed for this were not written by experts or people very familiar with the topics covered, and these videos praised Brilliant for it's easy to learn topics. The lack of expert or negative reviews could be seen as suspicious, however no evidence was found of Brilliant actively removing dissenting opinions.

Under the Site Content section, Brilliant lays out what is considered "fair use" of their content. This has the potential for abuse as their definition of "Content" includes anything that Brilliant has on their website or sends to you directly. This could include lessons or other media they provide to you, but also includes logos, their name, or virtually anything known publicly about the company that they provide on their website, and in the terms specifically state that "public display" and "publicly perform" are included as copy written material. This could be potentially leveraged as a way to use copyright to suppress sharing information and user reviews, as the only way to use their "content" is with express written permission<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brilliant |date=2025-07-14 |title=Terms of Use |url=https://brilliant.org/terms-of-use/ |url-status=live}}</ref>. <blockquote>User agrees that all content and materials (collectively, "Content") delivered via the Service or otherwise made available by Brilliant at the Site are protected by copyrights, trademarks, service marks, patents, trade secrets or other proprietary rights and laws. Except as expressly authorized by Brilliant in writing, User agrees not to sell, license, rent, modify, distribute, copy, reproduce, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, publish, adapt, edit or create derivative works from such materials or content. Reproducing, copying or distributing any content, materials or design elements on the Site for any purpose is strictly prohibited without the express prior written permission of Brilliant.</blockquote>When searching for dissenting opinions about Brilliant on YouTube reviews do come up, however finding sources with no incentives to lean one way or another was difficult. Many videos by various creators come up, but most made it clear in the descriptions of the videos that they were sponsored by Brilliant or gave softball criticisms that were walked back. One video by Wiggle was the only truly negative review that was found, but as of writing this he has 787 subscribers, so it is unclear if this video would have garnished enough attention to be noticed by Brilliant's legal team. Wiggle goes on to say that "the idea is not to teach anything, but make you feel like you're learning a lot"<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wiggle |date=2024-08-09 |title=Is Brilliant.org A Scam? |url=https://youtu.be/mzNYsPuEsRI?si=FF0mr0kTsuC0qAQ- |access-date=2025-07-14 |website=YouTube}}</ref>, a far more critical statement than any other videos reviewed. It is also worth noting that most videos reviewed for this were not written by experts or people very familiar with the topics covered, and these videos praised Brilliant for it's easy to learn topics. The lack of expert or negative reviews could be seen as suspicious, however no evidence was found of Brilliant actively removing dissenting opinions.

===Termination===

@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 ===Site content===
-Under the Site Content section, Brilliant lays out what is considered "fair use" of their content. This has the potential for abuse as their definition of "Content" includes anything that Brilliant has on their website or sends to you directly. This could include lessons or other media they provide to you, but also includes logos, their name, or virtually anything known publicly about the company that they provide on their website, and in the terms specifically state that "public display" and "publicly perform" are included. This could be potentially leveraged as a way to use copyright to suppress sharing information and user reviews, as the only way to use their "content" is with express written permission<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brilliant |date=2025-07-14 |title=Terms of Use |url=https://brilliant.org/terms-of-use/ |url-status=live}}</ref>. <blockquote>User agrees that all content and materials (collectively, "Content") delivered via the Service or otherwise made available by Brilliant at the Site are protected by copyrights, trademarks, service marks, patents, trade secrets or other proprietary rights and laws. Except as expressly authorized by Brilliant in writing, User agrees not to sell, license, rent, modify, distribute, copy, reproduce, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, publish, adapt, edit or create derivative works from such materials or content. Reproducing, copying or distributing any content, materials or design elements on the Site for any purpose is strictly prohibited without the express prior written permission of Brilliant.</blockquote>When searching for dissenting opinions about Brilliant on YouTube reviews do come up, however finding sources with no incentives to lean one way or another was difficult. Many videos by various creators come up, but most made it clear in the descriptions of the videos that they were sponsored by Brilliant or gave softball criticisms that were walked back. One video by Wiggle was the only truly negative review that was found, but as of writing this he has 787 subscribers, so it is unclear if this video would have garnished enough attention to be noticed by Brilliant's legal team. Wiggle goes on to say that "the idea is not to teach anything, but make you feel like you're learning a lot"<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wiggle |date=2024-08-09 |title=Is Brilliant.org A Scam? |url=https://youtu.be/mzNYsPuEsRI?si=FF0mr0kTsuC0qAQ- |access-date=2025-07-14 |website=YouTube}}</ref>, a far more critical statement than any other videos reviewed. It is also worth noting that most videos reviewed for this were not written by experts or people very familiar with the topics covered, and these videos praised Brilliant for it's easy to learn topics. The lack of expert or negative reviews could be seen as suspicious, however no evidence was found of Brilliant actively removing dissenting opinions. <!-- While the lack of evidence is not evidence, it is certainly suspicious. I could not find any direct evidence of a video being taken down by Brilliant, but I admit I am not sure how you would find a video that was taken down.  -->
+Under the Site Content section, Brilliant lays out what is considered "fair use" of their content. This has the potential for abuse as their definition of "Content" includes anything that Brilliant has on their website or sends to you directly. This could include lessons or other media they provide to you, but also includes logos, their name, or virtually anything known publicly about the company that they provide on their website, and in the terms specifically state that "public display" and "publicly perform" are included as copy written material. This could be potentially leveraged as a way to use copyright to suppress sharing information and user reviews, as the only way to use their "content" is with express written permission<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brilliant |date=2025-07-14 |title=Terms of Use |url=https://brilliant.org/terms-of-use/ |url-status=live}}</ref>. <blockquote>User agrees that all content and materials (collectively, "Content") delivered via the Service or otherwise made available by Brilliant at the Site are protected by copyrights, trademarks, service marks, patents, trade secrets or other proprietary rights and laws. Except as expressly authorized by Brilliant in writing, User agrees not to sell, license, rent, modify, distribute, copy, reproduce, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, publish, adapt, edit or create derivative works from such materials or content. Reproducing, copying or distributing any content, materials or design elements on the Site for any purpose is strictly prohibited without the express prior written permission of Brilliant.</blockquote>When searching for dissenting opinions about Brilliant on YouTube reviews do come up, however finding sources with no incentives to lean one way or another was difficult. Many videos by various creators come up, but most made it clear in the descriptions of the videos that they were sponsored by Brilliant or gave softball criticisms that were walked back. One video by Wiggle was the only truly negative review that was found, but as of writing this he has 787 subscribers, so it is unclear if this video would have garnished enough attention to be noticed by Brilliant's legal team. Wiggle goes on to say that "the idea is not to teach anything, but make you feel like you're learning a lot"<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wiggle |date=2024-08-09 |title=Is Brilliant.org A Scam? |url=https://youtu.be/mzNYsPuEsRI?si=FF0mr0kTsuC0qAQ- |access-date=2025-07-14 |website=YouTube}}</ref>, a far more critical statement than any other videos reviewed. It is also worth noting that most videos reviewed for this were not written by experts or people very familiar with the topics covered, and these videos praised Brilliant for it's easy to learn topics. The lack of expert or negative reviews could be seen as suspicious, however no evidence was found of Brilliant actively removing dissenting opinions. <!-- While the lack of evidence is not evidence, it is certainly suspicious. I could not find any direct evidence of a video being taken down by Brilliant, but I admit I am not sure how you would find a video that was taken down.  -->
 ===Termination===