(2012-12-30, 12:07 AM)Yumi Wrote: [ -> ] (2012-12-30, 12:00 AM)anori Wrote: [ -> ]The party buying a datbase is a third party so.
What makes you think that?
(2012-12-30, 12:00 AM)anori Wrote: [ -> ]There is no way around that anybody who obtains the information from the users who was not the current owner of the information when they signed up is simply a third party.
Are you implying that every time the site gets a new owner, users have to agree with all the terms again?
(as far as laws are concerned, you are incorrect - contracts pass onto the new owners of a business and do not automatically nullify unless otherwise specified)
Their is though a difference between downloading a database and just passing the site on to a different person. Which the topic is about, just downloading a database and selling that to a third party is not covered by the current agreement. Meaning you are currently not allowed to do so. Again passing on the admin to another users is a grey area.
In the end the simplest conclusion is, their are lots of ways to do this which fall in a grey area between allowed / not allowed. Which is funny since the topic is about is it ethical. In my opinion with the current TOS its not (never is in my opinion but okay) but its also half the time with the way it is done not even allowed.
(2012-12-30, 12:10 AM)anori Wrote: [ -> ]Their is though a difference between downloading a database and just passing the site on to a different person.
And what is this difference?
(2012-12-30, 12:10 AM)anori Wrote: [ -> ]Again passing on the admin to another users is a grey area.
I love these so called 'grey areas'. How many do we need to make this 'contract' unenforceable?
(2012-12-30, 12:13 AM)Yumi Wrote: [ -> ] (2012-12-30, 12:10 AM)anori Wrote: [ -> ]Their is though a difference between downloading a database and just passing the site on to a different person.
And what is this difference?
(2012-12-30, 12:10 AM)anori Wrote: [ -> ]Again passing on the admin to another users is a grey area.
I love these so called 'grey areas'. How many do we need to make this 'contract' unenforceable?
Isn't that the whole point of this topic. Currently their are no rules that don't have a way around them and in the future it might not be a bad idea for governments to finally start making very strict rules. If they want to protect user information. Currently their is not one rule that is not bendable which makes it also so weird one country does A the other does B.
Their should simply be a set of fixed rules dictating what a admin can and cannot do with user information. Just like any other cooperation the only area were apparently nothing like this applies is currently the internet. Where anybody can do anything with information. If just done in such a way that it goes around certain laws.
That's why i fully agree with brad its not ethical to just sell user information behind their backs. Something that happens just a tad bit to often with forums if you ask me. Recent example would be the walking dead forum which was sold over night without any prior notification. Besides that if you do intent to sell a whole database what is exactly the problem for not allowing members who do not wish this to simply allow them to delete all their information. The funny argument about the SEO is not warranted anyways anymore since if you sell the database to merge if with another site the whole SEO ranking is gone anyways..
Quote:Since i value the user rights above my own. And a stupid SEO ranking vs user rights the choice at least for me is clear.
But you're making the argument a user has a "right" to delete that account. I disagree with that assumption. Legally you're not required to delete their account upon their request. Ethically I think you have a higher obligation to your community than a single user. Deleting their posts/content may negatively effect the overall community.
Also for those with marketplaces you run the risk of deleting evidence of a deal. You could possibly be assisting a scammer by deleting their account. I'm fairly sure both PP and Ebay do no allow account deletions. You can deactivate it only. Sites in such cases have a moral obligation to keep the content imho in case any legal issues arise.
Lots of good reasons imho to deny users the ability to delete their content.
Quote:Besides that if you do intent to sell a whole database what is exactly the problem for not allowing members who do not wish this to simply allow them to delete all their information. The funny argument about the SEO is not warranted anyways anymore since if you sell the database to merge if with another site the whole SEO ranking is gone anyways..
Not true.
(2012-12-30, 12:24 AM)labrocca Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:Since i value the user rights above my own. And a stupid SEO ranking vs user rights the choice at least for me is clear.
But you're making the argument a user has a "right" to delete that account. I disagree with that assumption. Legally you're not required to delete their account upon their request. Ethically I think you have a higher obligation to your community than a single user. ...
Their is though a huge difference between the tos of most MYBB forums and the things you named like Ebay. Those terms of services cover all these things while the one from MyBB (default) does not. If you change it fine (its still unethical) but you have all the rights you need. Doing it without changing the TOS you have no rights to do this by default.
Quote:
Quote:Besides that if you do intent to sell a whole database what is exactly ...
Not true.
If you merge a site with another one the whole urls are gone unless you intent to keep all the old stuff up as well to redirect this..
(2012-12-30, 12:19 AM)anori Wrote: [ -> ]Isn't that the whole point of this topic.
No, and you didn't answer my question.
But you have admitted that there are no legal foundations for any of the points you've made, which implies that any attempt to reason with law is pointless. Ethical beliefs can vary from person to person, so I have little interest with exploring this.
(2012-12-30, 12:47 AM)Yumi Wrote: [ -> ] (2012-12-30, 12:19 AM)anori Wrote: [ -> ]Isn't that the whole point of this topic.
No, and you didn't answer my question.
But you have admitted that there are no legal foundations for any of the points you've made, which implies that any attempt to reason with law is pointless. Ethical beliefs can vary from person to person, so I have little interest with exploring this.
Simply put depending on what you do with user information it can be tested in court if its legal. Keep in mind though.. the TOS from most sites is not legally tested well from about all sites. Something that can only be ruled about by a judge.
But that would never happen, anyways its pointless to argue i guess. Laws differ from country to country which is why you can do anything you wish on the internet with user data. Until somebody finally changes that (which will slowly start to happen over the next couple of years) their is indeed for certain countries no legal binding way.
Except the missue of trust giving to you as admin by the users. By blatantly lying to them in the TOS which states what their rights are. Since their wont ever be a site dragged to court for that everybody can keep doing what they wish if that is what you want to hear.
Refusing to delete an account is a risky tactic to take. By my understanding (I'm no lawyer), it is illegal to hold personal data of an identifiable data subject without their consent.
The European data Directive Article 7 specifies:
Quote:a) the data subject has unambiguously given his consent; or
Although a user can go through and delete
most of their data, some data cannot be removed, such as logs. This is identifiable data, and must be deleted by you (the board owner). Honestly, deleting an account really takes no time at all.
Similarly, under the UK data protection Act 1998, you cannot hold personal data if it will cause damage or distress to the subject. By refusing to remove the data, it could be argued that you are causing distress.
But I'm no lawyer, and I would remove an account if requested.
Buying a database for merging or new ownership of a site and similar is not the intent of the default registration agreement. The intent is to indicate that your personal information will not be disclosed or sold solely for your personal data, not as part of a site transfer. At least that is how I interpret the intent of that message no matter where I read it.
Also, it does not appear that many of you complaining/questioning selling a site database actually own a real big board, not the MyBB definition of 100k posts, but a real big board, around or over 1M posts that are making some form of a living from them.
great SEO ranking is way more than any 10 users to be honest as the SEO results can draw in 10x that many users in the long run. pulling content is nothing any admin should ever want to do.
regarding the passing of information and the related agreements between owner and user, they survive to the new owner. If nothing changes in the agreement, why do you care who owns it? If the agreement changes or you dont like the new owner, then stop visiting the site.
(2012-12-29, 06:13 PM)Crayo Wrote: [ -> ] (2012-12-29, 06:08 PM)Jimmy. Wrote: [ -> ] (2012-12-29, 01:37 PM)Crayo Wrote: [ -> ]Jimmy I didn't own Cyber Tech Forum. I owned Market Forums which had 105k posts when merged.
So 35k + 35k + 105k = 175k. I'm sure there are more as well, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad thing, it has worked for FK.
Aren't you Anxiety? And didn't Quad own Market Forum? Also, Market Forum has my Forum, The Tech Players database. It has 90K Active posts.
Yes I am. Quad owned market-forum.net or something, mine was marketforums.org, it was at 105k posts when I sold it to Philly. I have never owned Cyber Tech Forums, I actually tried to buy it once ages ago.
I see. Thanks for clearing it up.