dann recently posted a new draft of the Terms of Service. This has resulted in a number of concerns being expressed by various noders. This node has been created with the express purpose of soliciting input. I do not expect any posts to conform to any noding convention, except for the use of paragraphs insofar as their lack would affect legibility. Linking is not required, nor do you have to post anything "for the ages" since this node may well be removed once it's served its purpose.
Before we go anywhere with it, I would like to point out and highlight the opening line in the ToS draft node:
This is a draft document, and several major revisions are expected before it goes into force.
It's not my intention to accuse anyone of overreacting but I understand that some noders were pretty upset by some of the clauses in the draft. I'll suggest that everyone concerned take a deep breath and take that first line to heart as much as, and even more than, any of the content following it. There will be revisions. Major revisions may be based on your feedback. Feedback that's useful and productive will be translated into legalese and then looked at again. The greatest idea on A4 paper can suddenly look like a recipe for trouble on legal
paper. Or something gets lost or added in translation. Which may indeed be the problem with some of the points in the draft.
DO WE NEED A TERMS OF SERVICE?
Yes. Both the site as an organisation and its users (we as real people) are, legally speaking, persons entering into an agreement. The gist of this agreement is that we upload our writing and E2 distributes it. Both we and E2 need a document that clearly and unambiguously spells out the terms of this relationship insofar as each party's rights and obligations are concerned. It's better for us (and some people have asked for it) and it's better for the site if everyone knows where they stand. The lack of a ToS does absolutely nothing for the consistency of the staff's actions. This is something that many, many people have complained about in the past. Ground rules are necessary because the management can't keep on playing by ear and making up policies on the fly and as the need arises.
Now on the topic that seems to have caused the most debate and consternation. You've heard it from clampe. You may have heard it from Jack (who is very keen on getting more input but is currently underway somewhere, which is why I'm posting this), TheDeadGuy, or other admins who've been involved. You may have understood it to be unwritten but firm policy:
Everything2, BSI, and MSU have no designs on your intellectual property rights. You own what you post, period.
I understand that the wording in the draft may be suspect. I had to do a double take myself when I read it. But one reason for posting a public draft is to have more eyeballs reviewing it.
In that sense it's been quite successful. I can pretty much guarantee that this part of the draft (here's the magic word again, draft) will be rewritten. Not because you or I object, to tell
the truth, but because it is not well written and it does not reflect the management's intentions. That's why we call it a draft.
Creating a ToS is an administrative act with the interest of the site in mind. Say some litigious ex-noder decides to go Johnnie Cochran on us. The management needs to be able to point to
something more tangible than "usual practice"--it needs a formal, written policy on certain matters, particularly those that could potentially expose the site to legal liability of some sort.
Companies put "CAUTION: HOT" notices on things that are steaming not because they're liquid nitrogen but because you ordered piping hot coffee. To some extent, this follows that logic. The
site needs to cover its back from a legal point of view.
The big question that follows is whether the ToS is acceptable to your customers. The management on E2 has a very close relationship with the userbase. dann and clampe are not
sitting in some board room in Omaha directing our fate as an economic abstraction or as a game. They're in the front line and understand who we are and what we do. If your target audience is
surfers, well, you probably won't want to put No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service in your Terms of Service. Likewise, with a bunch of volunteer contributors who are (and are entitled to be)
protective of their writing, nobody's going to try and tell them that they're signing over their rights to the site or anyone else.
Although I think that the management has made itself clear, everyone is still welcome to submit ideas and concerns that they have regarding the ToS draft to this node. You may not hear
directly from someone but least one and probably several members of the policy group will read your view and, if the concerns are valid and have not already been addressed, will
bring them up in a future policy discussion. Should a number of people find it useful to discuss the subject more interactively, the catbox and the forum will both
work. Of course you could still /msg dann, as the Newsletter suggests. This is quite effective. Honest.