SCRUFF and Jack'd, reviewed on the privacy policy they share
Two apps marketed to different crowds, one document. Both privacy links land on the same Perry Street Software policy, last revised 4 August 2026 — so the privacy question a buyer thinks they are choosing between has already been answered the same way twice.
People compare these two apps as if they were rivals. SCRUFF is sold on one aesthetic, Jack’d on another, and the forum advice tells you to weigh them against each other on discretion. That comparison has a problem. Follow each app’s own privacy link and you arrive at the same document. For adults, 18+; what is examined below is paperwork, not people.
So this review runs on one axis: if the privacy terms are identical, what is actually being chosen?
Where the links go
One document, two storefronts
The opening paragraph of the Perry Street Software privacy policy does the work without any interpretation from us. It says it describes what Perry Street collects from visitors to and users of the websites at scruff.com, jackd.com, shop.scruff.com and perrystreet.com, and from its Apps.
A reader deciding between the two apps on privacy grounds is comparing a document with itself. Whatever the marketing implies about two separate scenes, the data-handling commitments a user is offered are one set of commitments, made by one named party, revised on one date.
One honest limit on that. The redirects prove where the public privacy links land; they do not prove that no supplementary notice exists anywhere else — an in-app disclosure or an app-store privacy label could say something further, and we did not read one. And nothing fetched here establishes an acquisition date, an ownership share, or any corporate history. The observation is narrower and firmer than the usual “who owns what” post: these two privacy URLs converge on one policy.
What the shared policy actually commits to
Retention is where most policies get vague, and this one is no exception, though at least it is legible about being vague. It says personal information is kept for as long as reasonably necessary for the purposes described, while there is a legitimate business need connected to a registered account, or as required by law — whichever is longer. Email preference information is held until the user opts out. There is no number. A reader hoping for “deleted within 30 days of account closure” will not find it.
What the policy does spell out at length is the profile warning. It states plainly that profile information and use of the Service — including geographic location and travel plans — may be visible to other users, and it says in capitals that you should not put information in your profile you want kept private, naming location and travel information specifically. It goes further and concedes that even where the interface lets you hide a field, users abusing the Service may still be able to obtain it.
The rights sections are segmented by jurisdiction — Europe, Korea, California, plus blocks on consumer health data, biometric data and dating safety — so what a reader is owed depends on where they sit, and a global readership does not all get the strongest version.
The blast radius argument
The reason this matters beyond trivia is concentration. When two apps share an operator and a policy, they share an incident. A failure of process at the operator is not a SCRUFF problem or a Jack’d problem; it is one problem with two user bases attached. Nothing here says such a failure has occurred — we found no evidence either way and are not implying one — but a buyer who thinks they have diversified by choosing the other app has not.
Set that against the pattern we described in our review of AdultFriendFinder’s own contract: the documents are on the open web, unauthenticated, and they answer the question people are actually asking. They are just rarely opened.
Pros and cons
Verdict
Our assessment: pick between these two on the room, not on privacy, because on privacy there is nothing to pick. Read the profile warning before you fill in a profile, keep travel plans and precise location out of the fields the policy tells you are visible, and check the revision date yourself — it moved on 4 August 2026 and will move again.
The wider lesson is the dull one this desk keeps arriving at. Most privacy comparisons in this market compare brands. The brands are cheap to change; the document is the thing that binds, and here it is one document wearing two logos.