New Boards.ie Terms of Use and Privacy Policy - your feedback welcome

Jazzy

DeVore wrote: »

diatribe

you are just so excellent with words. where did you study?

onq

Seems like the usual badly written, poorly proofread one-sided piece that publishers worldwide think protects them.

For example, regarding material published - although quotations therein may be termed fair use the posters definitely do not and can not confer copyright to Boards.ie.

You are Web publishers.
You need to review boards.ie liability in the public domain.
I suspect you are unwise to think that setting terms for laypersons expecting them to be competent enough to check copyright issues absolves you in any way from your responsibilities.

I hope you've tried to do your due diligence and paid a solicitor al of money to look over this.
Really though, you need an Opinion based on recent case law - a Barister's Opinion.
Then you take out the appropriate insurance and wait for the day.

Someone somewhere will post under the GPL.
Someone else will include a copyrighted article extract.
Another person will post something he himself has already copyrighted.

I doubt the copyright will pass to you in the way you describe.
Not deleting such posts leaves the site not in compliance with its TAC.
At that point you've set a precedent which looks like it undermines the new TAC.

Get a Barrister's Opinion.
Read the new Defamation Act.
http://www.attorneygeneral.ie/eAct/2009/a3109.pdf
And try and loosen up a little for your own sakes.

HTH

ONQ.

masteroftherealm

ynotdu wrote: »

Unless the laws in Ireland have been changed, ANY internet site would have to go through the Guards to take any action action against an individual.

If the isp gave out names of subscribers willy nilly upon request then the account holder would have recourse to bring legal action for breach of privacy.

Having said that most internet sites have changed their T&C's in the last couple of years.It would be crazy of them not to in order to protect themselves from Litigation,it started in America were a single devious individual could be awarded so much money they could close a site.

The site owners have to protect themselves,sad but true the 'innocent'days are over on the www!:(

No but boards can contact the ISP with an IP Address which the ISP can match to an account and take action themselves on.

fozzle

Darragh, in the TOU it specifies that users between 13 and 18 years of age need permission from a parent or guardian, in the Privacy Policy the specified age group is 13 to 17. Sorry if it's already pointed out - by the time I got through the two threads my brain was too fried by screaming-train-baby to read any more.

Steveire

Hi,

Can I get some more information on these points from the terms of use?

You agree NOT to use Boards.ie to:

• modify, adapt, translate, or reverse engineer any portion of Boards.ie, or use any robot, spider, site search/retrieval application, or other device to retrieve or index any portion of Boards.ie, except as expressly authorised in writing by Boards.ie
• reformat or frame any portion of the web pages that are part of Boards.ie

One of my "to do someday" tasks is writing software to use boards without a web browser. These terms might make the idea a non-starter on boards, so I'd like to know what you think.

There is already some work started on getting content from KDE forums out of the web browser and into kmail or a more specialized application. I was considering adapting that work to boards, or more generally any vBulletin based website.

That could possibly (I haven't actually looked considerably at this yet) involve writing code to parse the html response of a request or several responses of several requests, extracting the content of threads and posts and caching it in a format usable without a web browser (through kmail/knode or desktop widgets for example) and providing a way to respond to threads. It could possibly also involve retrieving and responding to PMs in some way more convenient than with a web browser.

Would such a thing be against the terms of use? It would not be a robot, but would respond to users requesting a thread or post, just like a web browser would.

Not directly related, but leading to similar questions, is it intended to be against the terms of use to use greasemonkey or similar to change the appearance of the site in a browser or to add features? Years ago I wrote a greasemonkey script to remove the milonic menu and use a self written menu which worked with any vBulletin site and placed the menu at the top and the bottom of threads and forums.

Is it against it against the terms to use adblock? It changes the format of the page. How much control does boards.ie claim about what I can do with the data of the response to a HTTP request?

Thanks,

Steve.

johnnyskeleton

DeVore wrote: »

We've been reporting people to their workplace/boss/nanny since day 1. If you attack my site, I will attack your life.

With the greatest of respect, comments like these really worry me and have the potential to discourage people to express their opinions freely.

Rev. BlueJeans

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

With the greatest of respect, comments like these really worry me and have the potential to discourage people to express their opinions freely.

As do the anecdotes of people having received IP and other information, seemingly based only on their own concerns (which may or may not be justified-my concern being that those who know those in the know can access personal info for their own ends-I am not suggesting the poster in question wasn't justifiably worried, because I simply don't know).

I trust DeV implicitly, but he can't be accountable for all of those who run the site on his behalf-and let's be honest-as far as us users go, he is the founder admin-where are the rest of them?

bug

I've just logged in for the first time in a week or three and been met with this.

I joined when there were no terms and conditions other than the individual charters on each forum, which were to be adhered to rather than legally binding.

After a quick read, (obviously you lot have been discussing this at length), I disagree with the following:

"By posting any Material on or through Boards.ie, you grant us a limited license to use, modify, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce, and distribute such Materials in connection with Boards.ie or the promotion thereof.

The license you grant to us is non-exclusive, royalty free and fully paid, sub licensable, and worldwide.

You agree that your Material displayed on Boards.ie may continue to appear on Boards.ie, even after you have terminated your user privileges or have had your user privileges terminated by Boards.ie. "

This is all new to me, because I granted no such licence, limited or otherwise to reproduce, sub-licence or other wise at my time of joining. Is this retrospective?

Should I discontinue using this account now that I have publicly noted that I disagree with the terms and conditions?

Eoin

Have you read the full thread? I am pretty sure there were T&Cs when you signed up. Also, there's loads of clarification on the licence to reproduce the content. Everytime this page is loaded, your content is being reproduced - therefore the need to grant the licence.

Rev. BlueJeans

eoin wrote: »

Have you read the full thread? I am pretty sure there were T&Cs when you signed up. Also, there's loads of clarification on the licence to reproduce the content. Everytime this page is loaded, your content is being reproduced - therefore the need to grant the licence.

There is indeed, and although that has been clarified here, it needs to be done properly within this document. Ass covering for the purpose of rendering content is, it seems necessary, but leaving an open door to cherry pick our ramblings, is not.

I know the lads are probably still on their break, but this should be put to bed once they return-it is after all, them, at the behest of some bespectacled bean counter legal eagle, who put it out there in the first place.

Darragh

Yes, still on the break, but reading all the time.

Not only will I be putting this - and all the other matters - to bed once we get back, but I'll be tucking it in tightly with a little teddy bear*, some hot chocolate, a copy of its favourite book and a healthy dose of chloroform and make sure that revision 3 of these TOU don't have to happen for a good long while.

Thanks all for the feedback - I'm compiling the list of what is going to our advisor today and will keep you posted on progress.

Hope you're enjoying the festive season

Darragh

(* = no, not that bear)

Nevyn

bug wrote: »

I've just logged in for the first time in a week or three and been met with this.

I joined when there were no terms and conditions other than the individual charters on each forum, which were to be adhered to rather than legally binding.

After a quick read, (obviously you lot have been discussing this at length), I disagree with the following:

"By posting any Material on or through Boards.ie, you grant us a limited license to use, modify, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce, and distribute such Materials in connection with Boards.ie or the promotion thereof.

The license you grant to us is non-exclusive, royalty free and fully paid, sub licensable, and worldwide.

You agree that your Material displayed on Boards.ie may continue to appear on Boards.ie, even after you have terminated your user privileges or have had your user privileges terminated by Boards.ie. "

This is all new to me, because I granted no such licence, limited or otherwise to reproduce, sub-licence or other wise at my time of joining. Is this retrospective?

Should I discontinue using this account now that I have publicly noted that I disagree with the terms and conditions?

There were T&C when you created your account.
Boards already archived off the last 10 years and gave a bunch of people access to a copy of it to do things with.

http://data.sioc-project.org/

Welcome

Welcome to the boards.ie SIOC Data Competition! This is a competition in which entrants must do something interesting with the boards.ie SIOC Data Set (e.g. create a web application, write a report on analyses of the data, build a tool to visualise the information, etc.). Read the rules.

There will be three prizes for the top entries, as judged by an independent panel of three experts:

* The first prize is an Amazon.com voucher for $4000!
* The second prize is an Amazon.com voucher for $2000!
* The third prize is an Amazon.com voucher for $1000!



Overview of the data

Ten years of discussions from the Irish forum site boards.ie are available in SIOC format at the download page. The top-level site document links to users (and to FOAF files) as well as to top-level forums. Forums link to subforums and threads, which finally link to individual posts. The posts link to each other based on replying and quoting. The FOAF files also link to each other, describing a social network based on the users' buddy lists.

The data in total (over 10 years) is around 9 million documents and takes about 50 gigabytes of disk space, so we have sliced it into smaller archives. The first slices available are all of the data for the year 1998, the site, forums, users and FOAF documents - all in RDF/XML file format. More information on the structure is available.

The Clamper

Hi
I have read some of the pages on this thread, i admit not reading all the info can possibly blur my reply, however, here goes my tuppence worth

i can only guess as to the reasons for this updated rules change,

these things are usually borne out of pedantic nerdy types causing problems deliberately or by someone misreading the rules to suit their needs

i am surmising here, but it appears that some people are having a problem with the changes to the point where common sense is going out the bloody window

if you hate the changes that much, then do us a favor and go wherever they allow the punters to run the site without boundaries or regs

it should be clear and obv that these changes are to protect the users from spammers etc and keep an air of professionalism about it

c'mon lads, (and ladies) common sense is all they seem to want, i cant imagine that they are deliberately spoiling your fun or making life difficult on purpose

cut them some slack and row in behind the rule changes or go somewhere else, its really that simple

I personally may not always agree with the decisions etc of the mods but i know who runs it and have to respect that they control it and if i dont like it, the vote with my feet
i think its a great site, loads of info for my needs, and thats all i am looking for

Derek

johnnyskeleton

The Clamper wrote: »

if you hate the changes that much, then do us a favor and go wherever they allow the punters to run the site without boundaries or regs

...

c'mon lads, (and ladies) common sense is all they seem to want, i cant imagine that they are deliberately spoiling your fun or making life difficult on purpose

cut them some slack and row in behind the rule changes or go somewhere else, its really that simple

Well if you look at the first post by Darragh, who speaks for and is one of punters who run the site, he specifically asked for:

Darragh wrote:

This is the first revision of both documents and are an important step for us. We welcome all questions, though if there is something you disagree with, please do let us know below with your reason.

Your input will be most appreciated and valid points will be factored in to the next revision.

So, quite apart from asking people to row in behind them, they are looking for constructive feedback for their next revision. I don't think anyone on this thread is asking for the site to be run without boundaries or regulations.

CFlower

Thaedydal wrote: »

There were T&C when you created your account.
Boards already archived off the last 10 years and gave a bunch of people access to a copy of it to do things with.

http://data.sioc-project.org/

Any feedback on whether they were takers for this, who they were, and what they are doing with the data ?

onq

Wibbs wrote: »

<snip thoughtful long-winded post>

Sweet zombie jeeebus. That was a bit long winded as an aside. Even for me.:o I have to confess an evening of fine wines and good company. Ahhh drunken posting. Rarely done it before, but I can see it's attractions

Its attractions would be appreciated even more if your readers were similarly pasted.

Pass the vino.

ONQ.

Nevyn

CFlower wrote: »

Any feedback on whether they were takers for this, who they were, and what they are doing with the data ?

There were several.

http://sioc-project.org/node/335
http://www.sioc.me/
http://markmail.org/message/fdtlkwdacfcbljn7

HereSince2003

The manner in which this is happening is a bit dubious to me. Don't agree with the new terms retrospectively as there were none when I joined in 2003.
If some one is going to tell me that there were T&C's then(Keep seeing that mentioned a lot in this thread) when I joined then please provide a link or a copy of them. I could not find any, nor using other sources could I find any links to them.

Ponster

It's not the answer that you're looking for but seeing as you didn't actually create an account in 2003 you would never have seen the T&C.

People who lurk don't have to sign up/agree to anything.

aidan_walsh

HereSince2003 wrote: »

The manner in which this is happening is a bit dubious to me. Don't agree with the new terms retrospectively as there were none when I joined in 2003.
If some one is going to tell me that there were T&C's then(Keep seeing that mentioned a lot in this thread) when I joined then please provide a link or a copy of them. I could not find any, nor using other sources could I find any links to them.

Did you see the ones when you signed up in 2009?

Quazzie

Ponster wrote: »

It's not the answer that you're looking for but seeing as you didn't actually create an account in 2003 you would never have seen the T&C.

People who lurk don't have to sign up/agree to anything.

I think it's obvious that he/she is referring to a second account of his/hers and he/she posted this because he/she feared doing so with his/her other account.

masteroftherealm

When u signed up to vbulletins software u agreed to a T&C statement, so yes there was a T&C a long ling way back.... always has been.

Ponster

Quazzie wrote: »

I think it's obvious that he/she is referring to a second account of his/hers and he/she posted this because he/she feared doing so with his/her other account.

I thought of that but then considered the idea of someone signing up with a second account just to ask a question in feedback a little too "tin-foil hat" for me.

Quazzie

I think some people are genuinely worried about these new T&C, because as your aware different people have different levels of involvement. Me 99% of what I post is just random BS chit chat and boards.ie are more than welcome to use it.

Personally though I am the basis of a thread on the Construction & Planning forum which is following the progress of my own self build. As part of this thread I offered up plans to my house in PDF form so that people have an idea on what way I am building and so they can reference it throughout the thread. Does this mean that Boards.ie now has unlimitted use of these plans that I spent months working on?

That's just my personal question, there are other people a lot more involved in the site than I am so they might have more to lose.

Boards used to be all about the user, it was always an Internet home for some, a safe place where all opinions were valid, and were usually moderated fairly. Now it seems it has a false sense of importance in itself, and feels the need to push these T&C on the users thus putting Boards.ie before the users. It used to be that Boards was the users. This certainly creates a clear line.

masteroftherealm

These T&C's come down to one thing, some of us have been around for a long time and know how boards "used" to be. But people have to realise boards is no longer a small community website, its one of the most popular sites in the country and is a company also, nit just a few mates running a forum.
A company MUST protect itself from litigation and thats what the T&C's are, if you read back I have personal issues with a some paragraphs from a profesisonal standpoint but overall I understand that a large company with investors must protect its liabilities.

Ponster

Quazzie wrote: »

Boards used to be all about the user, it was always an Internet home for some, a safe place where all opinions were valid, and were usually moderated fairly. Now it seems it has a false sense of importance in itself, and feels the need to push these T&C on the users...

I honestly think that it's sense of importance isn't false and that the T&C is something that has been taken for granted for too long now.

In 2004 I admined a much smalled site (5000 members) yet out T&C was a lot more strict that the current Boards one and our members didn't get as much say in ours as we have here.

To answer your question, I *think* that Boards does have the right to use your house plans, as would other sites such as the BBC News (who much similar T&Cs). I guess what we need to do is judge the risk associated and act accordingly.

ynotdu

masteroftherealm wrote: »

No but boards can contact the ISP with an IP Address which the ISP can match to an account and take action themselves on.

That is true but to an extent the member would have to post something outrageous or the poster could still have recourse to law.It is a discussion site so posts would be open to interpretation,The ISP,s cannot act as Admins/Mods for a site!

Who would win in a 'test'case in the unlikely event it came to that?
This does happen a lot on a nudge nudge,wink wink, basis already by ISP,s mobile phone operators and websites,should it be proved though the providers/sites could be on the losing end.

It would be a shame as discussion of many subjects could become taboo.
All above an extreme 'worst case scenario' i know,but this is feedback and Lawyers can find loopholes in the t&c,s of almost anything:eek:

cheers

ynotdu

CFlower wrote: »

Any feedback on whether they were takers for this, who they were, and what they are doing with the data ?

Good question!:)

masteroftherealm

ynotdu wrote: »

That is true but to an extent the member would have to post something outrageous or the poster could still have recourse to law.It is a discussion site so posts would be open to interpretation,The ISP,s cannot act as Admins/Mods for a site!

Who would win in a 'test'case in the unlikely event it came to that?
This does happen a lot on a nudge nudge,wink wink, basis already by ISP,s mobile phone operators and websites,should it be proved though the providers/sites could be on the losing end.

It would be a shame as discussion of many subjects could become taboo.
All above an extreme 'worst case scenario' i know,but this is feedback and Lawyers can find loopholes in the t&c,s of almost anything:eek:

cheers

Abuse of the site or posting illegal/defamatory material would be recourse to contact an ISP, IMO.
And any legal challenge to that decision would stand up in a court due to existing laws, online is merely a new medium of communication, we have libel/defamation/incitement to hatred/racism/violence laws already on the statute books.

ynotdu

masteroftherealm wrote: »

Abuse of the site or posting illegal/defamatory material would be recourse to contact an ISP, IMO.
And any legal challenge to that decision would stand up in a court due to existing laws, online is merely a new medium of communication, we have libel/defamation/incitement to hatred/racism/violence laws already on the statute books.

There are grey area,s,read my post!
If someone finds that their isp has given out the account holders name without going through the proper channels and the site used that in a malicious way then both in theory could be sued for breaching their Privacy t&c,s.

Posters have rights also ya know!