mailing list archives
Service contracts and "Morally objectionable activities"
From: Kevin <kkadow () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:39:24 -0600
On 1/17/06, Bill Nash <billn () bacchus billn net> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Matt Ghali wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Robert E.Seastrom wrote:
The first and second paragraphs are sane. The last paragraph gives Go
Daddy the right to capriciously and arbitrarily delete your domain for
any reason they wish ("Morally objectionable activities will include,
but not be limited to...")
Do you believe that your philosophical objections to the language absolves
you as a customer from the minimal due dilligence of knowing what you are
Find me a registrar that DOESN'T have that kind of language in their user
agreements, then tell me if anyone wishing to do any kind of e-commerce
has a choice.
Yes, but that language DOESN'T have to stay in YOUR agreement.
Many registrars will negotiate contract language, at least for larger customers.
My employer isn't a huge network operation, with just a few hundred domains,
but is big enough to have staff counsel, and stubborn enough to routinely
stonewall ISPs and registrar's into removing content related clauses from
Messes with my project deadlines, but better late than Godaddy.
I've gone off on a tear about this before: A registrar has a license to
print money. Boilerplate user agreements that leave the user zero recourse
are the standard. I haven't seen a registrar yet that doesn't have this
kind of verbiage completely freeing them from liability for *any* action
taken on a domain registration, including none.
And this is why, if any money is riding on the service at all, you
at least one law talking guy vet all contracts at the front of the process.
- Service contracts and "Morally objectionable activities" Kevin (Jan 18)