> By accessing or using this site, you acknowledge and accept the following terms. I’m pretty sure this is already questionable in the EU.
---
No Terms. No Conditions
51–60 of 149 posts
Re: No Terms. No Conditions
#52> By accessing or using this site, you acknowledge and accept the following terms. I’m pretty sure this is already questionable in the EU.
---
It depends, not everything requires explicit consent. Where it doesn’t, it’s sufficient if the terms are clear, understandable, and transparent. The last criterion means that the terms must be prominently advertised in the locations where they apply.
Re: No Terms. No Conditions
#53I like how, even when the whole point is to not have any terms or conditions, there are still disclaimers. "Only for lawful purposes," "no warranty," "we are not responsible." Those are still terms and conditions!
If anyone knows that rules exist to be broken, it's Jorji. Glory to Cobrastan.
Re: No Terms. No Conditions
#54The URL basically nulls the license agreement.
Re: No Terms. No Conditions
#55This does not read like it was written by a professional. Non-professionals writing licenses and T&Cs cause problems because no organization, for profit or not, wants to be dragged into court to get a "common sense" definition of a word or comma defined, at their expense. I've heard of large organizations reaching out to places who use amateur T&Cs and licenses, saying "if we give you $X, can you dual license this as…
> > Access is not conditioned on approval I practice law in California. I've written terms of service that many, many people here on HN will have agreed to. I read this line and didn't know what it meant, or what it intended to mean. That said: > If you are actually a lawyer then it'd be interesting to hear your guidance, which I very much understand is not legal advice. If you're not a lawyer then I'm not. There's n…
You can be competent without being a lawyer, sure. But if you see the other replies to my comment, you see why I would use this as a filter.
The dumbest person can be right, but as a lawyer, your guess is much better.
I don't cede the law. It's just that if I find this unclear, then J Random Hn commenter's opinion wouldn't reduce my risk.
I won't be acting based on your opinion either, of course, but the quality of your reply is clearly in a different class from the other two.
Re: No Terms. No Conditions
#56This does not read like it was written by a professional. Non-professionals writing licenses and T&Cs cause problems because no organization, for profit or not, wants to be dragged into court to get a "common sense" definition of a word or comma defined, at their expense. I've heard of large organizations reaching out to places who use amateur T&Cs and licenses, saying "if we give you $X, can you dual license this as…
> I will not argue with you about how obvious it is. Good. Don't. Because it is exceedingly plain, if concise, English.
This is exactly the kind of comment I politely asked people not to make.
Did you see the actual lawyer saying they don't know what it means?
Re: No Terms. No Conditions
#57This does not read like it was written by a professional. Non-professionals writing licenses and T&Cs cause problems because no organization, for profit or not, wants to be dragged into court to get a "common sense" definition of a word or comma defined, at their expense. I've heard of large organizations reaching out to places who use amateur T&Cs and licenses, saying "if we give you $X, can you dual license this as…
Sounds like a smart strategy then. Use an amateur license. People who just want to do stuff know they have your blessing. Corporations will stay away or pay up, not because you made them, but of their own volition. Everyone is happy. Of course even better is to simply have no explicit license, especially for something like code. Normal people can assume they can do whatever they'd like (basically, public domain). Law…
You are essentially saying that shoplifting is legal because as a civilian you are unlikely to get caught.
This is a terrible take. All it takes is a litigious jerk, and you could get bankrupt. And that jerk will be legally in the right.
Re: No Terms. No Conditions
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like a smart strategy then. Use an amateur license. People who just want to do stuff know they have your blessing. Corporations will stay away or pay up, not because you made them, but of their own volition. Everyone is happy. Of course even better is to simply have no explicit license, especially for something like code. Normal people can assume they can do whatever they'd like (basically, public domain). Law…
No explicit license is not basically public domain. In most jurisdictions it means the default is full copyright, so permission is less clear, not more. The practical effect is usually to increase ambiguity rather than grant freedom.
That's the point: it's a rejection of the premise that you need these sorts of terms. You treat the law as the farce it has turned itself into. If people reject the farce, they can use it. If they support the farce, they can't (well, they can, but they think they can't). In a sense, an anarchist's viral FOSS license.
Re: No Terms. No Conditions
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like a smart strategy then. Use an amateur license. People who just want to do stuff know they have your blessing. Corporations will stay away or pay up, not because you made them, but of their own volition. Everyone is happy. Of course even better is to simply have no explicit license, especially for something like code. Normal people can assume they can do whatever they'd like (basically, public domain). Law…
You are essentially saying that shoplifting is legal because as a civilian you are unlikely to get caught. This is a terrible take. All it takes is a litigious jerk, and you could get bankrupt. And that jerk will be legally in the right.
I'm not. In saying people who want to share their work should just do so. If your goal is to not have terms, don't have terms. Don't lend credibility to the idea that you need to by default.
Consider the war on drugs. Recreational marijuana is still highly illegal everywhere in the US, but there's businesses selling it that operate in plain view. How did we get there? Because people continued to point out how the law delegitimized itself until enforcement has started to become impossible.
Re: No Terms. No Conditions
#60I wonder how many one-sentence prompts have made it to the HN front page at this point.
I don’t know, but it’s kind of boring to speculate since computers easily beat us at chess and go.