7 ms·
No Terms. No Conditions
- johnplatte 6mo agoComedically, this doesn't load from my IP address in the Russian Federation. (HN does.)
- stavros 6mo agoYes that was one of the nine terms the site didn't have.
- bayneri 6mo agounintended condition: cloudflare p.s. quick fix is "stop being lazy and move the single html off cloudflare"
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- volemo 6mo agoI’m not lazy, I’m just tired of the fucking AI crawlers trashing my bandwidth.
- replooda 6mo ago> 4. Nothing here is guaranteed, including availability, correctness, continuity, or fitness for any purpose. There you go.
- badrequest 6mo agohugged to death
- ayakut 6mo agobrilliant !
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- tosti 6mo agoSchrödingers terms and conditions
- amarant 6mo agoRead carefully if you are of a feline persuasion
- gnfargbl 6mo ago> Access is not conditioned on approval. The Zen Koan of T&C's.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- Barbing 6mo agoHope this slop doesn’t get anyone into trouble. Last updated: never No further pages. No hidden clauses. Not sure “last updated=never” works, but I don’t make terms and conditions websites.
- bayneri 6mo agouse at your own risk > 8. You are responsible for what you do, what you build, and what follows from either.
- FinnKuhn 6mo agoAs far as I'm concerned this doesn't mean anything legally unless I missed something. Aren't you already responsible for what you do or build anyways? Or is this somehow meant to mean something else but worded so badly it can't be understood.
- riteshyadav02 6mo ago[dead]
- steveharing1 6mo agoLast updated: never lol
- knorker 6mo agoThis 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 MIT, Apache, BSD, or hell anything standard?". > Access is not conditioned on approval Is this obvious enough legalese to not waste tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees if you get sued? Note before you reply: I will not argue with you about how obvious it is. 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.
- ndriscoll 6mo agoSounds 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). Lawyers will assume they cannot. The only thing stopping someone is their own belief in their self restrictions. i.e. you can use the thing if and only if you don't believe in my authority on the matter.
- iamnotai666 6mo agoNo 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.
- ndriscoll 6mo agoThat'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.
- Retr0id 6mo agoI wonder how many one-sentence prompts have made it to the HN front page at this point.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- ellyagg 6mo agoI don’t know, but it’s kind of boring to speculate since computers easily beat us at chess and go.
- Retr0id 6mo agoPreventing computer-based cheating in competitive chess is a big deal (and I assume go also), because spectators tend not to want to watch two computers playing against each other.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- Yhippa 6mo ago"Alternative Terms" was the giveaway.
- rrr_oh_man 6mo agoWhy? For what?
- functionmouse 6mo agoit's a prompt synopsis
- mat0 6mo agofor me it was the “No further pages. No hidden clauses.” Reeks of LLM
- rrr_oh_man 6mo ago
- weinzierl 6mo agoJust today I asked an LLM: "Often one generation values things much more than others. Boomers and their wristwatches. One generation is like 'only from my cold dead hands,' the others 'what would I even need this for?!' What are examples of things the youngest generation did away with?" If OP were a checklist, the answer would have checked every point.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- tech_jabroni 6mo agoNo alarms, no surprises
- joncrane 6mo agoMy mind when to the same thing. Great song.
- CobrastanJorji 6mo agoI 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!
- AndrewKemendo 6mo agoThis is the real salient point in this post in my opinion; It unintentionally demonstrates the limits of individual agency to avoid legal embroilments That is to say: it doesn’t really matter what this person puts on their website because there is a judge and a sheriff somewhere that can force you to do something that would violate the things you wrote down because the things you wrote are subordinate to jurisdictional law (which is invoked as you point out) It’s actually pretty poetic when you think about it because the page effectively says nothing because it doesn’t have content that the license applies to If it’s a art piece intended to show something about licensure all it does is demonstrate the degree to which licensure is predicated on jurisdiction
- goodmythical 6mo agoRight? Why include that? The law automatically applies. Including it in the license is just redundant. Had it simply read "You may use this site for any purpose." or "You may use this site." or "You may use this" or "This can be used." it would have the same level actual restriciton in that you obviously aren't allowed to use it to break the law regardless of what it actually says. And, having typed all that, I realize that there is another restriction in that it presumes that there is a 'you' using it. Things that are not 'you' cannot use it given that it specifically lists 'you' in the referenced parties. "This can be used" would be more permissive.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- zephen 6mo ago> Right? Why include that? The law automatically applies. Including it in the license is just redundant. Perhaps not. The law, as automatically applied, often include implied warranties.
- iamnotai666 6mo ago[dead]
- catlifeonmars 6mo agogoes without saying that this site definitely does not, legally
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- suoer 6mo ago[flagged]
- tsukikage 6mo agoPrior art: https://github.com/sorat0mo/wtfpl/blob/master/WTFPL2.txt https://github.com/sorat0mo/wtfpl/blob/master/WTFPL2.txt
- jborichevskiy 6mo agoI know this is mostly parody, but I'm curious if anyone has good starter templates for something that covers the general stuff and doesn't require a lawyer to customize
- willks 6mo agoI like the [Basecamp policies](https://github.com/basecamp/policies https://github.com/basecamp/policies). Explicitly open source, limited legalese.
- jborichevskiy 6mo agoThanks! Basecamp's and Github's were a few of the open source ones I came across
- self-portrait 6mo agoNo further update.
- layer8 6mo ago> By accessing or using this site, you acknowledge and accept the following terms. I’m pretty sure this is already questionable in the EU.
- _vsrp 6mo ago---
- layer8 6mo agoIt 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.
- dbvn 6mo ago[flagged]
- 9dev 6mo agoWho is "we"? Given the EU is the single largest foreign market openly accessible to the USA and all that money y’all invested into your pension ETFs needs constant growth to avoid shrinking, and the EU is your best bet on that… I’d recommend not ignoring us :-)
- catcowcostume 6mo agoWho us "us"? You? Your EU representative? Your country? The EU is much more insignificant than people within the EU like to admit.
- shevy-java 6mo agoIs that useful for anything?
- amelius 6mo agoThe URL basically nulls the license agreement.
- catcowcostume 6mo agoThat is not how T&C work.
- amelius 6mo agoIf a legal agreement comes in an envelope with the written text "this envelope contains BS", what do you think a judge will say about its validity?
- modzu 6mo agoi do wonder if the world would be a better place if instead of lawyers we had cage matches
- AnimalMuppet 6mo agoSouthwest Airlines got sued by some other company over, IIRC, color schemes. Southwest's CEO (Herb Kelleher) made an offer to the other CEO: They skip the lawyers and settle it with an arm-wrestling contest. The other CEO agreed. Eventually, they wound up selling tickets to the match, and donated the proceeds to charity. Now that's a civilized way to conduct a lawsuit.
- canacrypto 6mo agoA similar one I made a while back, inspired by South Park's disclaimer before each episode: https://github.com/jmrossy/south-park-license https://github.com/jmrossy/south-park-license
- 0xbadcafebee 6mo agoRemember when people started using WTFPL because it "sounded good", only to later find out it left them and their users legally liable? This is that but for websites.
- ThunderSizzle 6mo agoLiable of what and to what?
- zinekeller 6mo agoSince no-one bothered to answer, the way the license was written did not disclaim any warranty. Sure, US jurisprudence might beg that there is no implied warranty, but most jurisdictions would interpret that as having unlimited warranty. In most places, what-you-pay is not the default to warranty claims, but instead focuses on what are the actual damages to the user. Notably, Australian/NZ and EU (especially Germany and Austria) has extremely strong consumer protection laws which also covers software, and WTFPL didn't even attempt to limit liabilities. NB: For reference, here's the disclaimer for several popular licenses: MIT: THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE. GPLv3: 15. Disclaimer of Warranty. THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM “AS IS” WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION. 16. Limitation of Liability. IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MODIFIES AND/OR CONVEYS THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. 17. Interpretation of Sections 15 and 16. If the disclaimer of warranty and limitation of liability provided above cannot be given local legal effect according to their terms, reviewing courts shall apply local law that most closely approximates an absolute waiver of all civil liability in connection with the Program, unless a warranty or assumption of liability accompanies a copy of the Program in return for a fee. CC0 (just to drive the point home): 4. Limitations and Disclaimers. (Subsection a (which focused on trademarks and patents) omitted for brevity.) b. Affirmer offers the Work as-is and makes no representations or warranties of any kind concerning the Work, express, implied, statutory or otherwise, including without limitation warranties of title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, non infringement, or the absence of latent or other defects, accuracy, or the present or absence of errors, whether or not discoverable, all to the greatest extent permissible under applicable law.
- the_axiom 6mo agoamazing how such a simple website lags to scroll on my phone
- vincentabolarin 6mo agoNot sure how this is supposed to be useful, but I had a good laugh.
- tonymet 6mo agouse this if you want a corporation to use your content & IP to make money, while offering nothing to you (or the community) in return.
- pugchat 6mo ago[dead]
- getverdict 6mo ago[dead]
- chopete3 6mo agoIt seems a fun and curiosity website. Not for any real use.
- kilna 6mo ago#5 "Access is not conditioned on approval" would seem to be permission to DDOS.
- irenetusuq 6mo ago[dead]