[LINK] Microsoft Live Mesh

[Richard Chirgwin]

Marghanita da Cruz wrote:
> Richard Chirgwin wrote:
>> Sucker punch number one:
>>>
>>> You may be able to submit materials for use in connection with the 
>>> service. Except for material that we license to you, we do not claim 
>>> ownership of the materials you post or otherwise provide to us 
>>> related to the service (called a "submission"). However, by posting 
>>> or otherwise providing your submission, you are granting to the 
>>> public free permission to:
>>>
>>>     * use, copy, distribute, display, publish and modify your
>>>       submission, each in connection with the service;
>>>     * publish your name in connection with your submission; and
>>>     * grant these permissions to other persons.
>>>
>> (Terms of service, section 8)
>>
>> If that means what it seems to mean, if I store documents on the 
>> service, those documents become republishable by anybody.
>>
>> Sucker punch number 2: the governing law for Australian users is in 
>> Singapore. Hardly accessible for the user, should a legal dispute arise.
>>
>
> If you are in Darwin, or Perth, Singapore is probably more physically 
> reachable
> than Sydney or Melbourne.
>
> This is contract law, so I would guess the laws of the land are not 
> relevent.
That's silly: if the contract is governed by Australian law, then it's 
enforced in Australian courts. In this particular case, the contract is 
explicitly governed by Singaporean law. Moreover, I am not familiar with 
the capacity of someone from Australia to act as plaintiff in a 
Singaporean court - but I'll bet that people without either citizenship 
or residency do not have the same priority as citizens/residents.

As for the accessibility of Singapore to Darwin: I have heard that there 
are courts in Darwin, and that locals are able to access those courts 
without travelling to Sydney. That may of course only be a rumour...
> However, why is this any different to Google, myspace, youtube, 
> amazon, and no
> doubt a range of other sites offering all kinds of services.
I haven't checked everybody's terms of service, admittedly. The answer 
may be "no different at all"; but I don't sign on for services that put 
the service (or me) under the jurisdiction of some other country (that 
is, I don't enter an explicit contract to that effect). So if I want 
VoIP, my main reason for favouring a local provider is that any one of 
the 200-odd local VoIP providers are governed by the same laws as I am, 
which I see as a plus.

While Hew Raymond Griffiths' case was a criminal matter, not civil, it 
provides a cautionary tale: only a damn fool puts themselves under 
jurisdictions they don't understand without a very good reason. 
> Ofcourse all of this is only relevant if you were contemplating a 
> court case.
I strongly believe that compliance with local laws is very relevant to 
consumer protection for Internet-hosted services. It's something that 
people are encouraged to ignore (ie, "why worry? what's going to go 
wrong?").

Looking at VoIP again: the Communications Alliance has put a lot of work 
into understanding and communicating to VoIP providers their consumer 
protection and regulatory obligations; but of course the VoIP provider 
everybody thinks of first, Skype, not only ignores local regulation, it 
is actively hostile to any suggestion that local regulation has any 
relevance to it.

Paypal provides another example. Because Paypal here operates an 
Australian subsidiary company and has an AFS license here (only since 
January 2007, mind you), it is subject to Australian regulation - which 
is why the ACCC and Reserve Bank are empowered to act (although the 
limits of those powers are still to be tested). Without this, anything 
that goes wrong would be referred to some other country.

All too often, users are told to treat "cool factor" as more important 
than things like consumer protection.

RC
>
>> I guess other traps are there, if people want to read the ToS all the 
>> way through...
>
> Well I guess MS puts their view, you can take it or leave it.
> Or lobby the government to block the site until Australian
> Courts get  a cut of the action.
>
>
>>
>> RC
>>
>> stephen at melbpc.org.au wrote:
>>> Microsoft Reveals a Web-Based Software System
>>> By JOHN MARKOFF www.nytimes.com
>>> Published: April 23, 2008
>>>
>>> SAN FRANCISCO --- Microsoft is preparing to take its most ambitious 
>>> step yet in transforming its personal computer business into one 
>>> tied more closely to software running in remote data centers .. 
>>> Microsoft 'Live Mesh' .. its Web-based data storage and software 
>>> system .. Microsoft's late entry into a rapidly growing market 
>>> described as cloud computing .."software plus services." ..
>>>
>>> Live Mesh Tech Preview: <https://www.mesh.com/Welcome/LearnMore.aspx>
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> Cheers people
>>> Stephen Loosley
>>> Victoria, Australia
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Link mailing list
>>> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
>>> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>>>
>>>   
>> _______________________________________________
>> Link mailing list
>> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
>> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>>
>
>