Joyent ending "lifetime" hosting accounts

Post by jacques_chester » Sat, Aug 18, 2012, 4:55 AM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #266

jacques_chester wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people don't want damages or restitution. They want specific performance of the contract. In this case they may be in a position to get it. We're not discussing labour laws here, the slavery argument doesn't apply. This looks to me like straight up contract + equity. > Could a court really order Joyent to keep providing this service against their will? That's what an order for specific performance is for. I've e…

Please let me know what your law friend has to say, would really be interested in the reply.

Post by tripzilch » Sat, Aug 18, 2012, 11:00 AM UTC

drewmclellan wrote: post #164

cletus wrote: post #109

It never ceases to amaze me how many people "fall" for this "lifetime" pricing model. In fact I said the exact same thing three months ago [1]. The fact that the service provider is not getting any future revenue from you, even if they've fairly discounted your lifetime value, gives them the incentive to get rid of you. Additionally it gives the wrong incentives to users to "abuse" their "unlimited" service. You saw…

I was one of the original 200 to back TextDrive in with the VC200 accounts. The risk, of course, was that the venture wouldn't be successful and we'd be laying out $200 for less than $200 worth of hosting. If they were successful, $200 would buy a reasonable shared hosting account for life. Far from being naive and "falling" for the pricing model, my assessment was that 1) 200 shared hosting accounts (one server?) is…