I'm going to post this here because I can't find anywhere else to have a dialogue about the seemingly universal fondness for, and unqualified recommendation of, Dropbox. I'm someone who takes contracts seriously when I sign them, even when they're just meant to be boilerplate fluff, and I was really unhappy to read the following in Dropbox's ToS:
> You agree not to do any of the following while using the Site, Content, Files or Services:
> o Post, publish or transmit any text, graphics, or material that: (i) is false or misleading; (ii) is defamatory; (iii) invades another's privacy; (iv) is obscene, pornographic, or offensive; (v) promotes bigotry, racism, hatred or harm against any individual or group; (vi) infringes another's rights, including any intellectual property rights; or (vii) violates, or encourages any conduct that would violate, any applicable law or regulation or would give rise to civil liability;
I sent a mail to Dropbox saying the following:
> I'm used to seeing such passages in the ToS for bulletin boards and other public-facing chat forums, but it seems to be incredibly limiting to say that I cannot post, to a dropbox that is meant for my use only, information unless I know for a fact that it is true. (The ToS make no provision about belief; I simply cannot transmit text that is false.) This restriction seems already draconian enough; but requiring further that the true text be not misleading seems well nigh impossible.
but never received a reply. I understand that it's easy, and natural, to say "Oh, they'll never enforce that"; but should one really be willing to enter into a contractual relationship based entirely on the understanding that the actual contract will be ignored?
Comments
I'm going to post this here because I can't find anywhere else to have a dialogue about the seemingly universal fondness for, and unqualified recommendation of, Dropbox. I'm someone who takes contracts seriously when I sign them, even when they're just meant to be boilerplate fluff, and I was really unhappy to read the following in Dropbox's ToS:
> You agree not to do any of the following while using the Site, Content, Files or Services:
> o Post, publish or transmit any text, graphics, or material that: (i) is false or misleading; (ii) is defamatory; (iii) invades another's privacy; (iv) is obscene, pornographic, or offensive; (v) promotes bigotry, racism, hatred or harm against any individual or group; (vi) infringes another's rights, including any intellectual property rights; or (vii) violates, or encourages any conduct that would violate, any applicable law or regulation or would give rise to civil liability;
I sent a mail to Dropbox saying the following:
> I'm used to seeing such passages in the ToS for bulletin boards and other public-facing chat forums, but it seems to be incredibly limiting to say that I cannot post, to a dropbox that is meant for my use only, information unless I know for a fact that it is true. (The ToS make no provision about belief; I simply cannot transmit text that is false.) This restriction seems already draconian enough; but requiring further that the true text be not misleading seems well nigh impossible.
but never received a reply. I understand that it's easy, and natural, to say "Oh, they'll never enforce that"; but should one really be willing to enter into a contractual relationship based entirely on the understanding that the actual contract will be ignored?