Terms of Service - Didn't Read: help them grow!

[Léopold Baillard]

Hi everyone!

Maybe you've heard about Hugo Roy's wonderful initiative: Terms of
Service - Didn't Read that he launched recently with Michiel de Jong and
Jan-Christoph Borchardt. Their project aims at making you aware of what
you agree to when you click without thinking on the "I accept the terms
of service" on all the websites on which you have created an account. By
rating them from A (good) to E (very bad), they help every one of us to
actually now about what we are getting into.

Here is the website: <http://tos-dr.info/>.

These three people have lives and they do not allow them to contribute
as much as they'd like to the project. That's why they want to raise
money to be able to hire someone to help them.

So now it's our turn to help them for all the good job they've done and
that they will continue to do! You can contribute on their Indiegogo's
campaign here: <http://www.indiegogo.com/terms-of-service-didnt-read>.
--
L?opold Baillard
- FSFE intern in Berlin -

E-mail : leobaillard at fsfe.org
Mobile : + 49 (0) 151 21 40 55 46
GPG : 59C6 1CCA 2343 8DE4 D4FF D96A BC55 4A21 3B90 C658



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20120917/edd1934a/attachment.pgp>

[MJ Ray]

L?opold Baillard <leobaillard at fsfe.org>

Post by Léopold Baillard
Maybe you've heard about Hugo Roy's wonderful initiative: Terms of
Service - Didn't Read that he launched recently with Michiel de Jong and
Jan-Christoph Borchardt. Their project aims at making you aware of what
you agree to when you click without thinking on the "I accept the terms
of service" on all the websites on which you have created an account. By
rating them from A (good) to E (very bad), they help every one of us to
actually now about what we are getting into.
Here is the website: <http://tos-dr.info/>.

I don't see much about free software on there. Some free software
is mentioned briefly, under "No Class Yet".

The site itself claims to be free software (I have my doubts because
it looks like a derived work of other peoples' terms of service, so
wouldn't it be covered by their licences too? Which would probably be
AGPL-incompatible, leaving an undistributable mess), but doesn't it
mainly promote use of non-free software like Twitter at the moment?

Post by Léopold Baillard
These three people have lives and they do not allow them to contribute
as much as they'd like to the project. That's why they want to raise
money to be able to hire someone to help them.

"Hire someone" or "pay part-time and full-time expert curators".
What's the business model? Where will the money go?

If they reach the 10k (euros or dollars - it varies depending where
you look), that's a basic living wage for about 33 people-weeks. Even
that's ignoring the costs of hiring people. So say they pay 3
curators, where one is full-time and two are 0.5-time. That's 16
weeks at most - and then what happens? Another begging bowl?

It's a great project in some ways, but I'd like to know there's a plan
beyond burning 10k in maybe three months, else I feel there are better
projects for the money.

Regards,

[Heiki &quot;Repentinus&quot; Ojasild]

Hey,

Post by MJ Ray
I don't see much about free software on there. Some free software
is mentioned briefly, under "No Class Yet".

Promoting the freedom of the users takes more than simply promoting
Free Software. Some people will inevitably use non-free software and
environments for the user base or features not available elsewhere. If
they can easily understand what they actually get, then it is an
invaluable service. If one makes an informed decision to give up one's
freedom, then there is not much we can do. But we can make sure that
the decision is informed, and hope that most people will not give up
their freedom.

Post by MJ Ray
The site itself claims to be free software (I have my doubts because
it looks like a derived work of other peoples' terms of service, so
wouldn't it be covered by their licences too? Which would probably be
AGPL-incompatible, leaving an undistributable mess), but doesn't it
mainly promote use of non-free software like Twitter at the moment?

The software powering the site is licensed under AGPL. The content
need not be. Furthermore, the set of facts contained in the referenced
Terms of Services is not copyrightable. Only the specific tangible
expression is. Thus, no derivative work issues arise. Furthermore, if
they did, it would almost certainly be fair use. As you can read in
the footer, some of the content is also licensed under CC licences.

Post by MJ Ray
"Hire someone" or "pay part-time and full-time expert curators".
What's the business model? Where will the money go?
If they reach the 10k (euros or dollars - it varies depending where
you look), that's a basic living wage for about 33 people-weeks. Even
that's ignoring the costs of hiring people. So say they pay 3
curators, where one is full-time and two are 0.5-time. That's 16
weeks at most - and then what happens? Another begging bowl?
It's a great project in some ways, but I'd like to know there's a plan
beyond burning 10k in maybe three months, else I feel there are better
projects for the money.

Hugo Roy can probably give a better answer (I have cc-ed him), but, to
me, it seems that the crucial part is giving the site some momentum by
covering major services. Once that will be done, it will probably take
relatively little maintenance. Of course, if it generated sufficient
interest to attract future donors, then it would be possible to pay
some people for full-time work on keeping the site updated and
expanding the coverage.


Cheers,

[Hugo Roy]

I don't see anything to add to Heiki's email :)

About the 10K and what's next: since we're running as part of
Indiegogo's Gr?nder Garage contest, we'll obtain about 7.000 euros more
if we reach our goal of 10.000 euros. That should be enough to get the
project running still (I started it 3 months ago, but now I'm back at
university).

Thanks everyone!

PS: obviously, the project could be used to shed the light upon services
running free software, as they usually have better terms of service
regarding people's data and copyrights. Using free software and open
standards counts as a ++

Le mardi 18 septembre 2012 ? 11:44 +0000, Heiki "Repentinus" Ojasild a

Post by Heiki &quot;Repentinus&quot; Ojasild
Hey,

Post by MJ Ray
I don't see much about free software on there. Some free software
is mentioned briefly, under "No Class Yet".

Promoting the freedom of the users takes more than simply promoting
Free Software. Some people will inevitably use non-free software and
environments for the user base or features not available elsewhere. If
they can easily understand what they actually get, then it is an
invaluable service. If one makes an informed decision to give up one's
freedom, then there is not much we can do. But we can make sure that
the decision is informed, and hope that most people will not give up
their freedom.

Post by MJ Ray
The site itself claims to be free software (I have my doubts because
it looks like a derived work of other peoples' terms of service, so
wouldn't it be covered by their licences too? Which would probably be
AGPL-incompatible, leaving an undistributable mess), but doesn't it
mainly promote use of non-free software like Twitter at the moment?

The software powering the site is licensed under AGPL. The content
need not be. Furthermore, the set of facts contained in the referenced
Terms of Services is not copyrightable. Only the specific tangible
expression is. Thus, no derivative work issues arise. Furthermore, if
they did, it would almost certainly be fair use. As you can read in
the footer, some of the content is also licensed under CC licences.

Post by MJ Ray
"Hire someone" or "pay part-time and full-time expert curators".
What's the business model? Where will the money go?
If they reach the 10k (euros or dollars - it varies depending where
you look), that's a basic living wage for about 33 people-weeks. Even
that's ignoring the costs of hiring people. So say they pay 3
curators, where one is full-time and two are 0.5-time. That's 16
weeks at most - and then what happens? Another begging bowl?
It's a great project in some ways, but I'd like to know there's a plan
beyond burning 10k in maybe three months, else I feel there are better
projects for the money.

Hugo Roy can probably give a better answer (I have cc-ed him), but, to
me, it seems that the crucial part is giving the site some momentum by
covering major services. Once that will be done, it will probably take
relatively little maintenance. Of course, if it generated sufficient
interest to attract future donors, then it would be possible to pay
some people for full-time work on keeping the site updated and
expanding the coverage.
Cheers,