3 ms·

A Note About Vultr's Terms of Service

28 points by mfiro 3y ago

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
htrp 3y ago
Prior HN discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39836495 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39836495
- gnabgib 3y ago
  The relevant one to this is: "Cloud host Vultr rips user data ownership clause from ToS after web outrage" [0](79 points, 19 hours ago, 20 comments) [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39855365 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39855365
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
    Looks like you copied the wrong link. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39857680 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39857680
pcthrowaway 3y ago
So it turns out they've had these clauses in their ToS for a while now. The user who initially posted this on reddit was unable to access their account until they accepted the new ToS, which they probably didn't because they assumed this provision gave Vultr access to their data in a way they thought they hadn't already. I'd love to know what did in that ToS though. I think cloud providers (maybe all services really) should be required to provide some amount of notice of changes which the user will lose access to their data without accepting. Also would be really nice when providing said notice if they also included a diff from the last version the user had already accepted.
- kijin 3y ago
  > The user ... was unable to access their account until they accepted the new ToS This kind of behavior should be illegal. They're holding your property (data) hostage. Just a few weeks ago, one of my clients had their Vultr account suddenly suspended, within minutes of receiving multiple unexpected and mutually contradictory invoices that seemed to indicate some sort of billing error on Vultr's part. The client tried to resolve the issue with customer support, but that went nowhere because from Vultr's point of view, they no longer had an account with Vultr. Catch-22. Luckily, the client had heeded my recommendation to keep backups with a different provider in a different location. So after a brief consultation we decided, "fuck Vultr," and proceeded to restore our cluster elsewhere. Now I'm making sure that none of my other clients have any part of their infrastructure dependent on this joke of a VPS company.
  - pcthrowaway 3y ago
    I agree, but also, doesn't every cloud provider do this? What if a law changes that requires them to update their ToS and would make it illegal to provide service to foreign nationals without including it? I guess they should provide a data exit path at least.
    - kijin 3y ago
      Yes, they're obviously free to do business (or not) with whomever they want for any reason, but there should be a way to end the relationship without the unilateral threat of confiscating your property. This is going to become a bigger problem as data becomes more and more important.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ChrisArchitect 3y ago
Some more discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39857680 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39857680
Yizahi 3y ago
This Vulture scandal reminds me of an old anecdote about car mechanic. It's a translation, so it doesn't sound as nice as original. After getting invoice from car mechanic, a client goes over itemized list of parts and work, and in the middle sees an item called "it didn't fly - 10000". Client asks mechanic "What is this "it didn't fly" thing?". Mechanic sighs and says "Oh, well, it didn't fly. Removing.".
- op00to 3y ago
  Sounds like this Hotel Bill Skit from Saturday Night Live: https://youtu.be/iXPb5m2L0DE https://youtu.be/iXPb5m2L0DE
karmakaze 3y ago
Their original action may have been a mistake. This poor response isn't. They don't take full responsibility for the error. Instead they blame a reasonable interpretation of their words as an incorrect and highlight a positive contradictory portion. It's a bad look for Vultr.

28 points by mfiro 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

htrp 3y ago

Prior HN discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39836495 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39836495

gnabgib 3y ago
The relevant one to this is: "Cloud host Vultr rips user data ownership clause from ToS after web outrage" [0](79 points, 19 hours ago, 20 comments) [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39855365 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39855365
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
  Looks like you copied the wrong link. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39857680 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39857680

pcthrowaway 3y ago

So it turns out they've had these clauses in their ToS for a while now. The user who initially posted this on reddit was unable to access their account until they accepted the new ToS, which they probably didn't because they assumed this provision gave Vultr access to their data in a way they thought they hadn't already. I'd love to know what did in that ToS though. I think cloud providers (maybe all services really) should be required to provide some amount of notice of changes which the user will lose access to their data without accepting. Also would be really nice when providing said notice if they also included a diff from the last version the user had already accepted.

kijin 3y ago
> The user ... was unable to access their account until they accepted the new ToS This kind of behavior should be illegal. They're holding your property (data) hostage. Just a few weeks ago, one of my clients had their Vultr account suddenly suspended, within minutes of receiving multiple unexpected and mutually contradictory invoices that seemed to indicate some sort of billing error on Vultr's part. The client tried to resolve the issue with customer support, but that went nowhere because from Vultr's point of view, they no longer had an account with Vultr. Catch-22. Luckily, the client had heeded my recommendation to keep backups with a different provider in a different location. So after a brief consultation we decided, "fuck Vultr," and proceeded to restore our cluster elsewhere. Now I'm making sure that none of my other clients have any part of their infrastructure dependent on this joke of a VPS company.
- pcthrowaway 3y ago
  I agree, but also, doesn't every cloud provider do this? What if a law changes that requires them to update their ToS and would make it illegal to provide service to foreign nationals without including it? I guess they should provide a data exit path at least.
  - kijin 3y ago
    Yes, they're obviously free to do business (or not) with whomever they want for any reason, but there should be a way to end the relationship without the unilateral threat of confiscating your property. This is going to become a bigger problem as data becomes more and more important.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

ChrisArchitect 3y ago

Some more discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39857680 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39857680

Yizahi 3y ago

This Vulture scandal reminds me of an old anecdote about car mechanic. It's a translation, so it doesn't sound as nice as original. After getting invoice from car mechanic, a client goes over itemized list of parts and work, and in the middle sees an item called "it didn't fly - 10000". Client asks mechanic "What is this "it didn't fly" thing?". Mechanic sighs and says "Oh, well, it didn't fly. Removing.".

op00to 3y ago
Sounds like this Hotel Bill Skit from Saturday Night Live: https://youtu.be/iXPb5m2L0DE https://youtu.be/iXPb5m2L0DE

karmakaze 3y ago

Their original action may have been a mistake. This poor response isn't. They don't take full responsibility for the error. Instead they blame a reasonable interpretation of their words as an incorrect and highlight a positive contradictory portion. It's a bad look for Vultr.