5 ms·
VisualPing already does this: https://visualping.io/blog/how-to-monitor-changes-in-terms-and-conditions https://visualping.io/blog/how-to-monitor-changes-in-ter
by thephyber 3y ago
VisualPing already does this: https://visualping.io/blog/how-to-monitor-changes-in-terms-and-conditions https://visualping.io/blog/how-to-monitor-changes-in-terms-a...
Docacracy did it a decade ago, but closed shop.
The problem isn’t the tech — it’s coming up with a business model that pays for the system and upkeep. As much as people give lip service about privacy, they sure don’t throw money at lobbying efforts that protect their rights in those areas.
- jupp0r 3y agoYou can build this with what Github offers for free to open source projects.
- flamey 3y agoGitHub offers doesn't pay for motivation to do the upkeep.
- prepend 3y agoBut it reduces the cost of upkeep so now we need less motivation.
- 1-6 3y agoI like where this discussion is headed. Scrape the ToS and keep a record of that. Are ToS's copywrited?
- raffraffraff 3y agoThe problem is that these documents aren't served from standardized or predictable URLs across every service provider or regulatory body. I work with a firm who charge heaps of money to provide large companies with publicly available documents. Why do they pay? Because finding the latest copy of 25 different legal docs is a pain in the ass because the entire internet is a broken mess of 404s, over a long enough timeline.
- pwdisswordfishc 3y agoYes, at some point someone has probably written a copy.
- withinboredom 3y agoI thought contracts can’t be copyrighted? There is too much similarity between them for it to make any sense.
- hnbad 3y agoNo, that's nonsense. I don't know if there's a special exemption in the US but contracts and policies can be and absolutely are under copyright. Individual clauses might not be but the contract in its entirety likely meets the threshold of originality required for it to not simply be considered a plain collection of facts. The similarity between standard contracts does make it harder to demonstrate a copyright violation based on the text alone though.
- withinboredom 3y agoSo, you’re saying only one company in the history of the world can install garages, or every company that wants to install garages must pay that company or ensure that it’s contracts are distinctly different so they don’t get sued? That sounds absurd. What country is this?
- thephyber 3y agoThat’s not what your parent said and you jumped a lot of logical steps to get where you did. No form of intellectual property applies to “in the history of the world” — all IPs expire their monopoly protections after a period of time. And yes, contracts must be distinctly different from copyrighted contracts. [1] Just because computers and the internet allow copy-paste of content with no effort does not mean it is necessarily legal. [1] https://www.upcounsel.com/are-contracts-copyrighted#using-someone-else-s-contract-is-it-legal https://www.upcounsel.com/are-contracts-copyrighted#using-so...
- hnbad 3y agoYes, legal documents have copyright. This also means you can't take shortcuts by copying an existing privacy policy or ToS instead of writing your own unless you have their copyright holder's permission (which likely isn't even the person/company itself unless it was written by an in-house legal department). This also means you are likely violating copyright if you publish a contract you signed -- although you can of course summarize or rephrase it unless there is a valid NDA (most aren't). So technically scraping and republishing old ToS'es would be a copyright violation. You might have a case for fair use but then it becomes difficult to monetize the service.
- toastal 3y agoGitHub is also ran by a untrustworthy megacorp with a ToS. Just wait til the ToS changes to where you can’t use it to told others accountable.
- nanidin 3y agoI think that one of the benefits of dvcs is that it's relatively easy to move to another provider or self host, and that everyone that cloned has a copy.
- jb1991 3y agoThe cost of Github is not the cost referred to here.
- oever 3y agoCatch 22: first agree to the Microsoft GitHub ToS. Or you can use a friendlier service like the one provided by Codeberg. https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/what-is-codeberg/#what-is-codeberg-e.v.%3F https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/what-is-codeberg/#...
- MikusR 3y agoWhat is this then? https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/branch/main/TermsOfUse.md https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/branch/main/TermsOfUse...
- FireInsight 3y agoEverything has a terms of use. Codeberg is still way better for privacy and freedom.
- prepend 3y agoThey seem equally good for privacy and freedom.
- j-bos 3y agoWell consumers of the diff aren't yet required to agree.
- Jon_Lowtek 3y agoGitHubs privacy policy towards end users says they collect usage information and telemetry, among other data. So you host a project comparing ToS on GitHub and Microsoft collects information about anyone viewing the project, who referred them, their browser fingerprint and much more. This usage data might, depending on technical design, even enable them to collect fingerprints on features like opening the comment trees of specific contract clause.
- jupp0r 3y agoAt least you'll know when Githubs ToS change ....
- KingLancelot 3y agoWhy does such a thing need to be a business to begin with? Just host a github or expose this functionality on wikipedia.
- d1str0 3y agoNo one said it had to be a business. They were making the point that its hard to keep something like that running and maintained for free.
- gpvos 3y agoCrowdsource it. Something like Wikipedia might work.
- rat9988 3y agoThen do it.
- thephyber 3y agoMy point was there have already been open source / crowdsourced efforts and they typically fail — because the effort is high and there is little/no money because people don’t actually value the result. Solve the sustainable efforts problem and/or make the TOS publishing required to go to a standard service (like US public stocks have to publish forms to SEC.gov)
- iamacyborg 3y agoSelf hosted mediawiki is easy enough
- gls2ro 3y agoHosting is not the problem that generates the need for a business. The problem is having people available to do the work that is needed to keep the system useful and up-to-date, which includes writing code that will parse the ToS, maintaining it, and upgrading programming languages, packages ... and most probably lawyers. So where those diffs are hosted is a tiny cost of what is needed to make it work. All these require effort. And effort can be paid with one of two things: time and money. And for someone to have time to work full-time on this, they need to have ... money to sustain themselves. Thus this kind of project needs money => that either can be a grant, donation from a big entity, or business model. Donations from users are not working for long-term sustainability in most cases of good projects for society. Or at least I don't know a successful project like this.
- chrisjj 3y ago-1 for VisualPing.
- Realworld404 3y agoMy hypothesis is that a relatively small number of people actually care that much about digital privacy. People generally prefer convenience over privacy
- api 3y agoI see the creeping panopticon as being a bit like climate change. Anyone with some knowledge of history can see what horrible things might happen if we build a comprehensive surveillance machine, but nothing terrible has happened yet. It’s hard to convince people to give up convenience to prevent a danger that hasn’t yet come and cannot be clearly seen. With climate change it will take years of records for extreme weather being blown away. For this it might take a developed nation falling into hard core fascism and the digital dragnet being turned directly against its citizenry. China is perhaps a case with its social credit system and camps, but it might not be extreme enough and may be too far away. It may have to happen here, or much worse. Americans in particular think “it can’t happen here” even though it almost has several times.