DocBot created this point Terms of Service; Didn't Read - Phoenix and I am unsure about this.
It seems more fair than a blocker to me but on the other end, it still is, waving your rights.
What do you think?
A blocker rating seems unfair to me too.
Users still own their content under this agreement (under US law moral rights aren’t transferable anyways ) and they may only use the waiver “to reasonably exercise the rights granted in Section D.4, but not otherwise” which is strict enough to avoid any misuse.
We may need to adapt the case’s description for it to only apply on unjustified (what would justified mean?) or broad moral rights waiver.
Moreover, in the US only visual arts benefit from moral rights protection (source). So for a service like GitHub, which mainly hosts code, assigning a blocker point seems even more unfair.
What do you think of the following description?
Moral rights are non-economic rights of attribution (right to have the author’s name on the work) and integrity (right not to use one’s work to harm their reputation). Any service requiring its users to waive moral rights falls under this case, unless this is strictly necessary to provide the service*.
This subtle change can’t be detected by DocBot, so if it were to be applied, curators would need to be cautious when approving those points.
1 Like
Okay i have absolutely no clue about this topic ;D
What you are saying sounds reasonable to me, but like, i have no idea…
The current description mentions that any document mentionning the waiver of moral rights should fall under the case.
I am not sure what it means so I canr really say if a blocker is fair.
You can decide or we wait for another opinion ; D
1 Like