First of all, thanks to the Atlas folks for getting us involved in the review of the proposed T&C for the production service, and thanks to Adam for getting the ball rolling :-) Just to set the stage: I do host two probes and one Anchor, I signed up as an ambassador and I have been strongly in favour of the project. But, as this draft text is obviously set against a strong legalese background, I have to switch to that mode, too. In addition to the observation by Adam regarding 7.1 and 7.2 I'd like to make the comment regarding 10.1 even stronger: The User/Host is required to always have a correct registered email addrss, thus it seems to be reasonable to actively alert this user community about upcoming changes as an "info-push-service", rather than a "pull-service". On top of that, I think it would be responsible to allow for -say- 30 days advance notice before changes apply "automatically", rather than "immediately". But even more fundamental is the interaction of proposed 8.4a .. 8.4e versus Article 9. I can understand what the goal and the intention is, from the NCC's point of view, but I think it is not acceptable for me, as it stands right now. I even doubt that those provisions would hold up in court, if one of the parties is a private person ("consumer"). Within the same realm, the strict definition of Article 11, with 9.5 (and 9.7) is a no-go, imho. On the more editorial plane, I like to suggest to - s/critical Internet infrastructure/important Internet infrastructure/ as Critical Infrastructure is a heavily loaded term already in some countries, - check or rephrase the "email addresses of probes" in 4.4 - add a reference to the Anchor MoU in 6.1 - finally check the use of "liability" in 8.1: "...NCC may suspend its operation, avalability or liability to the Users" Hth, cheers, Wilfried Adam Piggott wrote:
Hello,
Having read the draft I find the T&Cs quite sensible but have some points to bring up.
7.1. [...] The RIPE NCC may perform security checks and audits to determine unauthorised use of the RIPE Atlas Service. 7.2. Users must assist the RIPE NCC with security checks and audits.
These are a very open-ended statements and I'm sure that RIPE NCC has no intention of visiting our homes or places of work to perform "security checks and audits". The terms are written in a "legalese" form of language and hence must be taken at face value by those who accept them. I would not be comfortable agreeing to these two points without some sort of clarification as to what "security audits and checks" could be, and what "assistance" I would be obliged to provide.
10.1. All the RIPE Documents referred to in this agreement are available on http://www.ripe.net/. The Probe Host will regularly take notice of updated RIPE Documents on the website.
I cannot accept this term. I can only accept to be bound to new terms if they are sent to me directly, for example by email. Article 2.3 seems to infer that RIPE NCC will indeed contact users directly at least 30 days in advance, which is acceptable.
Thanks to RIPE NCC for including the community in such an important process.