[mat-wg] Feedback on draft RIPE Atlas Service Terms and Conditions

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.