Walter van Kalken wrote:
>As I said, I sincerely doubt most (any) Myspace
members have read the Terms
>of Service, I can assure you that they are far more substantial than our own
>Terms of Service. Personally, I hope that the Board rectifies this.
>
>Danny
I am not aware we really have any terms of service...
At best, when we click on "save", we agree to put our content under gfdl.
Is there anything else ?
I think this would be impossible. I signed up, like
many, to certain
''terms of service'' and now all of a sudden they would get changed
after 3+ years of actively participating.
What and where did you sign ?
I feel that you would open up
a Pandora's box if you did that. I am not a lawyer
but I could see that
my edits which I contributed under the previous term of service I would
now actually have to give you permission again to keep them on the site
or else I would be able to have them withdrawn, because I wouldn't agree
to you using them under the new terms of service. Can you imagine the
chaos from this?
Frankly no.
Afaik, the only thing we have now is you agreeing to put your content
under GFDL. There is no reason that this should change.
Also you say you sincerely doubt that people read the
terms of service
...... that is true most probably because they are to long and written
in legalish. A language only known to a few people and not to poor
Englishspeakers like myself.
Privacy policy is translated and imho, not difficult to understand.
So, why could not we do it for terms of service ?
So what would be the use of new terms of
service that no-one would read and if they read it
they wouldn't
understand it anyway. Leaving the board in a position to do what they
want when they want it. I am sure many including myself didn't get
involved on the projects just to start having a big brother being able
to yank us of at will and still use our years of sweat we put into this.
Speaking for myself if such a thing would happen I would pursue every
legal way possible to get all of my edits removed from the projects.
Why all that negativism and bad vibes toward the board ?
Have you no faith and trust in us ?
Have you considered that "terms of use" does not only mean "the
editorship must obey to rules defined by the host provider", but rather
be a contractual document binding the Foundation and the editors
together ? Not only a document where editors are requested to respect
certain rules, but also a document where the Foundation engage itself to
ALWAYS respect certain things.
Example, as an editor, I would like the Foundation to engage itself to
ALWAYS provide dumps of project for free. This is not a requirement of
the licence. Right now, the place where the Foundation promises to
provide the content for free is the bylaws. But it does not clarify
whether the content provided for free will be article per article (ie,
on the website) or in a more gathered fashion (such as in global dumps
or dumps per categories).
There are other things I would like to see the Foundation always respect
in the future.
These things could indeed be clarified in the bylaws. But bylaws may be
changed much more easily than terms, and mostly, bylaws only require
board input to be changed. Whilst terms can not be changed without all
parties agreeing.
Ant
Waerth