25 ms·

File sharing services are listed as requiring pre-approval, so Seafile should've sent them an email before accepting it as payment: https://www.paypal.com/us/w

File sharing services are listed as requiring pre-approval, so Seafile should've sent them an email before accepting it as payment: https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/acceptableuse-full https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/acceptableuse-full They're well within their rights to decline your business. If a bank told the government, "We have no absolutely no idea what our customers are doing with their money or who they're sending it to. Maybe they're sending it to terrorists or drug lords, maybe they're not; it's none of our business and we respect their privacy", they'd get shut down in a heartbeat. I can understand if Paypal doesn't want to appear on the front page of the news for funding an underground child porn ring that signed up as one of your "enterprise clients".

Cyph0n 10y ago
Maybe their response in this specific case is warranted, but there are thousands of other smaller cases where PayPal simply does what it wants even if it's completely unfair and illogical. PayPal is a shitty company, with a borderline monopoly on online payments until very recently.
- aminok 10y ago
  PayPal is made shitty by the laws relating to the financial system. If it doesn't act shitty, it stands to get fined for hundreds of millions, or even billions of dollars.
rmc 10y ago
And if a EU company were to break the law and send personal data outside the EU, they'd be shut down in a heartbeat too.
- chopin 10y ago
  Unfortunately not. Are there any examples for this? I din't see any.
  - lars_francke 10y ago
    Not shut down but fined: http://fortune.com/2016/06/06/germany-privacy-adobe-unilever/ http://fortune.com/2016/06/06/germany-privacy-adobe-unilever... This is very recent (June) and I expect more of this in the future. So it is a real threat especially to smaller companies.
  - therealmarv 10y ago
    You can put every company which sends your personal data outside EU to court (Safe Harbour rules were kicked in the butt some time ago). Some people are even trying that with Facebook (and may be successful with that).
    - chopin 10y ago
      >Safe Harbour rules were kicked in the butt some time ago Yes I know that. Yet I don't know of any company being shut down who violates this. There are some minor fines which afaik are disputed. In my opinion this decision has been pretty toothless so far.
      - therealmarv 10y ago
        I think nobody is interested in shutting down companies in general. Fines can be hurtful in general and if you are a serious company you reduce your risks and do not do anything against the law. I would not say it is toothless... there is a big market now (even Microsoft is in there) which promotes cloud services in your own country.
    - stevetrewick 10y ago
      Extremely unlikely since a new framework was agreed by the Commission in February 2016 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-216_en.htm http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-216_en.htm
- therealmarv 10y ago
  yes this is illegal! They will be fined. No company in EU is allowed to send personal user data to USA without certain restrictions (e.g. Google Apps has a lot of extra legal documents and staff/etc. to keep sure you can use them also from the EU). From a legal point of view it is even forbidden to make business in EU with clients in e.g. WhatsApp (because their servers are outside of EU).
pavanky 10y ago
That argument makes no sense.. Presumably Seafile has other payment options that are not asking for the same level of access. I can't remember the last time people mentioned terrorists (or other criminals') bank accounts in the news other than HSBC who intentionally laundered drug money.
- SyneRyder 10y ago
  > Presumably Seafile has other payment options that are not asking for the same level of access. They don't. If you look at the website now, they are offering their services for free temporarily, because they don't have any payment providers anymore. It seems Paypal was their only method of payment. https://shop.seafile.com/product/seafile-cloud-account-subscription/ https://shop.seafile.com/product/seafile-cloud-account-subsc... > I can't remember the last time people mentioned terrorists (or other criminals') bank accounts in the news You might just need to look deeper. There was a Planet Money episode about how the IRS & DEA created an entire fake bank just to catch people laundering drug money: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/03/09/469674457/episode-418-how-the-government-set-up-a-fake-bank-to-launder-drug-money http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/03/09/469674457/episo...
  - matt_morgan 10y ago
    > They don't. If you look at the website now, they are offering their services for free temporarily, because they don't have any payment providers anymore. It seems Paypal was their only method of payment. This surprised me. The only time I've set up transactions with Paypal as the only option was when I didn't expect any transactions (a nonprofit that needed to have a public donation function for legal reasons, but actually got all its money from foundation grants). As a user, I don't mind Paypal as an option, but when it's the only option it doesn't give a good impression.
- MichaelBurge 10y ago
  Different companies have different risk profiles. A bank that operates entirely in one or two countries has a very different perspective than Paypal who operates in 200+ countries. Just to give one example: If you sold a comic that was offensive to Muslims in the US, it might get on the news but would ultimately be permitted. If Paypal allowed it, they could get blocked from countries that are predominantly Muslim. My bank offers international ACH, but only to Canada, Mexico, and Europe. I believe there is strength to limiting yourself to these. Paypal have chosen to operate as widely as possible, which can be a weakness in what they can allow From what I've seen, it's generally far more expensive to do international banking in most countries. My bank will do it for places like the Phillipines, but only as an expensive wire transfer. I think if it were easy to offer low-cost banking, they would offer it.
lovelearning 10y ago
Did Seafile never request for this approval?
ominous 10y ago
> They're well within their rights to decline your business. They are. Should we condone it? > "Maybe they're sending it to terrorists or drug lords, maybe they're not; it's none of our business and we respect their privacy" Isn't this similar to the idea of banning web browsers, as they render HTML which, as we all know, can be used to write text (plaintext!) inciting terrorism? And it sometimes is. Are you using a browser right now? Things we deem "evil" are planned using technology. Should we ban technology?
- vmateixeira 10y ago
 Isn't this similar to the idea of banning web browsers, as they render HTML which, as we all know, can be used to write text (plaintext!) inciting terrorism? And it sometimes is. Are you using a browser right now? Things we deem "evil" are planned using technology. Should we ban technology? Nicely answered. This 'safety' insanity is getting way out of control.
- lmm 10y ago
 > Isn't this similar to the idea of banning web browsers, as they render HTML which, as we all know, can be used to write text (plaintext!) inciting terrorism? And it sometimes is. Are you using a browser right now? Search engines and hosting services already monitor for illegal content. Reasonable people can disagree over whether requiring a filesharing service to monitor for illegal content is excessively onerous, but the slippery-slope fallacy does noone any favours. You can make any policy sound absurd by taking it to a far enough extreme. Often we do need to weigh up costs and benefits and take a policy line somewhere in the middle.
 - gambiting 10y ago
 I feel like "search engines" means only Google in this case. IF you want to look for porn or torrents or anything that does not show up on google just use Bing, it feels like the restrictions don't apply to MS at all because they are not the biggest search engine around.
 - woodman 10y ago
raimue 10y ago
Would you say DropBox is a file sharing service? Is every site that offers downloads a file sharing service? I would interpret this restriction for services similar to RapidShare, MegaUpload, etc. with the only intention of sharing files. Seafile is primarily for hosting your personal data.
- cakeface 10y ago
  1. Create an account 2. send the login info to all your friends 3. Upload whatever files you want to share. Now you all have access to download or upload. Its semi private because the files never leave the account. Similar to when people use an email account and only ever save drafts. Two people have the login info, connect to the account and write draft emails but never send them. I think I saw that in a tv show, not sure if it's a real thing.
  - brokenmachine 10y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petraeus_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petraeus_scandal "They would share an email account, with one saving a message in the drafts folder and the other deleting it after reading it."
CamperBob2 10y ago
One question is, once the US dollar becomes a vehicle for prior restraint -- meaning no one can own, spend or transfer it without meeting a long list of largely-arbitrary conditions imposed by the US government -- is it still "money" at all? Or is it just another extrajudicial law enforcement tool, backed up by the full faith and credit of a moral and intellectual toddler with 20,000 nukes? It would sure be nice if the next Satoshi, whoever he/she/it is, manages to create something (a) that scales properly, and (b) that ordinary people can actually use.
makecheck 10y ago
Why should banks expect to be shut down over that? Suppose I build a road. I would also have no idea what people are transporting on that road: maybe they’re moving drugs or sending stuff to terrorists, as you say. And it would be absolutely ludicrous to hold the road-builder in any way responsible for activities on the road. At some point, a service is just a service and it should remain firmly bounded. Yes, bad people exist. No, we shouldn’t screw with every little thing just in case bad people use those things.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

Cyph0n 10y ago

Maybe their response in this specific case is warranted, but there are thousands of other smaller cases where PayPal simply does what it wants even if it's completely unfair and illogical. PayPal is a shitty company, with a borderline monopoly on online payments until very recently.

aminok 10y ago
PayPal is made shitty by the laws relating to the financial system. If it doesn't act shitty, it stands to get fined for hundreds of millions, or even billions of dollars.

rmc 10y ago

And if a EU company were to break the law and send personal data outside the EU, they'd be shut down in a heartbeat too.

chopin 10y ago
Unfortunately not. Are there any examples for this? I din't see any.
- lars_francke 10y ago
  Not shut down but fined: http://fortune.com/2016/06/06/germany-privacy-adobe-unilever/ http://fortune.com/2016/06/06/germany-privacy-adobe-unilever... This is very recent (June) and I expect more of this in the future. So it is a real threat especially to smaller companies.
- therealmarv 10y ago
  You can put every company which sends your personal data outside EU to court (Safe Harbour rules were kicked in the butt some time ago). Some people are even trying that with Facebook (and may be successful with that).
  - chopin 10y ago
    >Safe Harbour rules were kicked in the butt some time ago Yes I know that. Yet I don't know of any company being shut down who violates this. There are some minor fines which afaik are disputed. In my opinion this decision has been pretty toothless so far.
    - therealmarv 10y ago
      I think nobody is interested in shutting down companies in general. Fines can be hurtful in general and if you are a serious company you reduce your risks and do not do anything against the law. I would not say it is toothless... there is a big market now (even Microsoft is in there) which promotes cloud services in your own country.
  - stevetrewick 10y ago
    Extremely unlikely since a new framework was agreed by the Commission in February 2016 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-216_en.htm http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-216_en.htm
therealmarv 10y ago
yes this is illegal! They will be fined. No company in EU is allowed to send personal user data to USA without certain restrictions (e.g. Google Apps has a lot of extra legal documents and staff/etc. to keep sure you can use them also from the EU). From a legal point of view it is even forbidden to make business in EU with clients in e.g. WhatsApp (because their servers are outside of EU).

pavanky 10y ago

That argument makes no sense.. Presumably Seafile has other payment options that are not asking for the same level of access. I can't remember the last time people mentioned terrorists (or other criminals') bank accounts in the news other than HSBC who intentionally laundered drug money.

SyneRyder 10y ago
> Presumably Seafile has other payment options that are not asking for the same level of access. They don't. If you look at the website now, they are offering their services for free temporarily, because they don't have any payment providers anymore. It seems Paypal was their only method of payment. https://shop.seafile.com/product/seafile-cloud-account-subscription/ https://shop.seafile.com/product/seafile-cloud-account-subsc... > I can't remember the last time people mentioned terrorists (or other criminals') bank accounts in the news You might just need to look deeper. There was a Planet Money episode about how the IRS & DEA created an entire fake bank just to catch people laundering drug money: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/03/09/469674457/episode-418-how-the-government-set-up-a-fake-bank-to-launder-drug-money http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/03/09/469674457/episo...
- matt_morgan 10y ago
  > They don't. If you look at the website now, they are offering their services for free temporarily, because they don't have any payment providers anymore. It seems Paypal was their only method of payment. This surprised me. The only time I've set up transactions with Paypal as the only option was when I didn't expect any transactions (a nonprofit that needed to have a public donation function for legal reasons, but actually got all its money from foundation grants). As a user, I don't mind Paypal as an option, but when it's the only option it doesn't give a good impression.
MichaelBurge 10y ago
Different companies have different risk profiles. A bank that operates entirely in one or two countries has a very different perspective than Paypal who operates in 200+ countries. Just to give one example: If you sold a comic that was offensive to Muslims in the US, it might get on the news but would ultimately be permitted. If Paypal allowed it, they could get blocked from countries that are predominantly Muslim. My bank offers international ACH, but only to Canada, Mexico, and Europe. I believe there is strength to limiting yourself to these. Paypal have chosen to operate as widely as possible, which can be a weakness in what they can allow From what I've seen, it's generally far more expensive to do international banking in most countries. My bank will do it for places like the Phillipines, but only as an expensive wire transfer. I think if it were easy to offer low-cost banking, they would offer it.

lovelearning 10y ago

Did Seafile never request for this approval?

ominous 10y ago

> They're well within their rights to decline your business. They are. Should we condone it? > "Maybe they're sending it to terrorists or drug lords, maybe they're not; it's none of our business and we respect their privacy" Isn't this similar to the idea of banning web browsers, as they render HTML which, as we all know, can be used to write text (plaintext!) inciting terrorism? And it sometimes is. Are you using a browser right now? Things we deem "evil" are planned using technology. Should we ban technology?

vmateixeira 10y ago
Isn't this similar to the idea of banning web browsers, as they render HTML which, as we all know, can be used to write text (plaintext!) inciting terrorism? And it sometimes is. Are you using a browser right now? Things we deem "evil" are planned using technology. Should we ban technology? Nicely answered. This 'safety' insanity is getting way out of control.
lmm 10y ago
> Isn't this similar to the idea of banning web browsers, as they render HTML which, as we all know, can be used to write text (plaintext!) inciting terrorism? And it sometimes is. Are you using a browser right now? Search engines and hosting services already monitor for illegal content. Reasonable people can disagree over whether requiring a filesharing service to monitor for illegal content is excessively onerous, but the slippery-slope fallacy does noone any favours. You can make any policy sound absurd by taking it to a far enough extreme. Often we do need to weigh up costs and benefits and take a policy line somewhere in the middle.
- gambiting 10y ago
 I feel like "search engines" means only Google in this case. IF you want to look for porn or torrents or anything that does not show up on google just use Bing, it feels like the restrictions don't apply to MS at all because they are not the biggest search engine around.
- woodman 10y ago

raimue 10y ago

Would you say DropBox is a file sharing service? Is every site that offers downloads a file sharing service? I would interpret this restriction for services similar to RapidShare, MegaUpload, etc. with the only intention of sharing files. Seafile is primarily for hosting your personal data.

cakeface 10y ago
1. Create an account 2. send the login info to all your friends 3. Upload whatever files you want to share. Now you all have access to download or upload. Its semi private because the files never leave the account. Similar to when people use an email account and only ever save drafts. Two people have the login info, connect to the account and write draft emails but never send them. I think I saw that in a tv show, not sure if it's a real thing.
- brokenmachine 10y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petraeus_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petraeus_scandal "They would share an email account, with one saving a message in the drafts folder and the other deleting it after reading it."

CamperBob2 10y ago

One question is, once the US dollar becomes a vehicle for prior restraint -- meaning no one can own, spend or transfer it without meeting a long list of largely-arbitrary conditions imposed by the US government -- is it still "money" at all? Or is it just another extrajudicial law enforcement tool, backed up by the full faith and credit of a moral and intellectual toddler with 20,000 nukes? It would sure be nice if the next Satoshi, whoever he/she/it is, manages to create something (a) that scales properly, and (b) that ordinary people can actually use.

makecheck 10y ago

Why should banks expect to be shut down over that? Suppose I build a road. I would also have no idea what people are transporting on that road: maybe they’re moving drugs or sending stuff to terrorists, as you say. And it would be absolutely ludicrous to hold the road-builder in any way responsible for activities on the road. At some point, a service is just a service and it should remain firmly bounded. Yes, bad people exist. No, we shouldn’t screw with every little thing just in case bad people use those things.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]