SourceForge Terms of Service Change, Users Unhappy

An email fluttering around a few mailing lists has been submitted in various forms here today. It's about changes to the SourceForge terms of service. Some relevant links unclude the old terms, new terms, old privacy statement, new privacy statement and contact for "questions or concerns" (Patrick McGovern, Site Director). Obviously since SF is owned by the same parent company as Slashdot, I'm biased and corrupt and you should ignore my opinions on the subject, but while I don't particularly like this any more then anyone else, I also don't think it's the huge deal that others are making of it. Especially considering projects aren't paying for the free service. You get what you pay for after all. I have attached a summary to this article of the changes that are being called into question if you don't want to do a mental diff on the links above.

This list was submitted by a few different users and was apparently originally posted to several mailing lists, although I don't know who actually originally wrote it. I just quote it here for reference.

1. They can henceforth change the terms without notice, just by posting the new terms on the website. (Currently they are obliged to give 15 days notice by email, a period that we are currently in for this change.)
2. They can henceforth remove user accounts without giving a reason. (Currently they are obliged to have a reason, though the set of acceptable reasons is open-ended.)
3. They're no longer obliged to make the contents of a deleted account available to its owner. (There was previously a "reasonable effort" clause to that effect.)
4. They're no longer obliged to provide notice of changes to the privacy policy, unless the changes are "substantive". (Currently they are obliged to provide notice of any change.)
5. The privacy policy is acquiring a disclaimer that amounts to "this is not true". It actually disclaims the entire privacy policy.

Comments

I can understand what the controversy is about

[LordOfYourPants]

"Other Notification: In order to implement or enforce the Terms of SourceForge.net, SourceForge.net may use personal information to contact users on an individual basis."

What this basically means is that they reserve the right to call you on the phone at 3 AM and breathe heavily.

you get what you pay for

[Anonymous Coward]

You get what you pay for after all.

An ironic quote coming from someone who supports FREE software.

Coincidence?

[jeroenb]

After being registered for over two years, about a week ago I started my first project there. And a couple days later they change their policies so they can kick me off, keep all the stuff I put up there, contact me whenever they want and sell my personal information. Coincidence? :-)

Taco turns Republican

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't particularly like this any more then anyone else, but I also don't think it's the huge deal that others are making of it. Especially considering projects aren't paying for the free service. You get what you pay for after all.

Ain't it always the case? You start making lots of money and the Republicans start making sense.

Re:hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe the states who are continuing the anti-trust case plan to buy SourceForge and empty it to host the upcoming Windows source code?

You get what you pay for?

[thunker]

Lets see...I don't pay for Slashdot. OK now I know what you mean.

You get... wha?

[spindo]

"You get what you pay for after all", what a laugh coming from a open source advocate. BillG must love it when comments like this get pointed out to him.

Something is missing.....

[Chuck Chunder]

This article simply isn't complete without the standard "VA = Satan himself and I told you so first" comment from Bowie J. Poag.