3 ms·

Is anyone else bothered by the vague, overbroad restrictions in DigitalOcean's terms of service? Particularly: "2.5 You agree that you will NOT use DigitalOcea

by graue 13y ago

Is anyone else bothered by the vague, overbroad restrictions in DigitalOcean's terms of service? Particularly: "2.5 You agree that you will NOT use DigitalOcean's services to: [..] Transmit, distribute, post, store, link, or otherwise traffic in information, software, or materials that is offensive, abusive, inappropriate, malicious, or detrimental" Almost anything can be offensive to someone. I compared the Linode and AWS terms of service and neither has anything like this. While none of my own content is by any means extreme, the presence of this provision seems like a red flag and has kept me from switching to DO.

trekky1700 13y ago
Wait, people actually read the Terms of Service?
- grayrest 13y ago
  If you're going to use it for your business it might be a good idea.
- kGrange 13y ago
  Most "people" don't, but if you're on Hacker News, I'm going to assume you're a little more tech-oriented than most "people." In that case, check out ToS's on the services you use. They're, suprisingly, usually not that long or hard to read.
aroch 13y ago
That's pretty standard boilerplate language for a ToS. It essentially protects DO from someone suing them because a client is doing something offensive (like say, running a mail server to email the Goatse pic to as many people as possible)
- eurleif 13y ago
  Wouldn't http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communicatio... protect them regardless?
  - gcb0 13y ago
    Yes. And their lawyers know that. This is a permission to kick any client they wish, but it looks like it is boilerplate protection from abuse stuff.
Maxious 13y ago
> I compared the Linode and AWS terms of service and neither has anything like this. "No Illegal, Harmful, or Offensive Use or Content" is literally the first point in the AWS ToS and is all about what is "offensive" http://aws.amazon.com/aup/ http://aws.amazon.com/aup/ > You may not use, or encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to use, the Services or AWS Site for any illegal, harmful or offensive use, or to transmit, store, display, distribute or otherwise make available content that is illegal, harmful, or offensive.

by graue 13y ago

trekky1700 13y ago

Wait, people actually read the Terms of Service?

grayrest 13y ago
If you're going to use it for your business it might be a good idea.
kGrange 13y ago
Most "people" don't, but if you're on Hacker News, I'm going to assume you're a little more tech-oriented than most "people." In that case, check out ToS's on the services you use. They're, suprisingly, usually not that long or hard to read.

aroch 13y ago

That's pretty standard boilerplate language for a ToS. It essentially protects DO from someone suing them because a client is doing something offensive (like say, running a mail server to email the Goatse pic to as many people as possible)

eurleif 13y ago
Wouldn't http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communicatio... protect them regardless?
- gcb0 13y ago
  Yes. And their lawyers know that. This is a permission to kick any client they wish, but it looks like it is boilerplate protection from abuse stuff.

Maxious 13y ago

> I compared the Linode and AWS terms of service and neither has anything like this. "No Illegal, Harmful, or Offensive Use or Content" is literally the first point in the AWS ToS and is all about what is "offensive" http://aws.amazon.com/aup/ http://aws.amazon.com/aup/ > You may not use, or encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to use, the Services or AWS Site for any illegal, harmful or offensive use, or to transmit, store, display, distribute or otherwise make available content that is illegal, harmful, or offensive.