New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
@kerouac well yes but reducing an argument to ridiculous proportions does not really illustrate a point well, the terms as you wrote above would be considered unfair and obviously thrown out of court.
If however the terms said, no content that can insight hate or cause distress or upset against a group of people or individual* are allowed and must be taken down within 48 hours of reasonable request or you may face loss of service.
*In the case of an individual any content must be specifically targeted at them
That would most likely stand up in a court without issue because it is not unreasonable, regardless of what anyone thinks of free speech etc no one would day that is an unfair term or stance for a commercial entity to take, especially if they let you know in advance of paying a penny.
Anyway I don't think either of us can truly judge what is right until we see it and as that is looking less likely now I suspect it was more than was portrayed and in either case DC's can be dicks about any abuse reports to the point of being none human and I suspect the host has simply bowed to pressure.
A DC I get some IP's from will even make you reply to a spamcop summary report or else they shut down your server within 24 hours..... that is automation gone crazy
Ha, i know all too well mate. I made a thread a while back about hosting less than desirable content (not illegal, just things that might offend) and was told by some people to piss off out of the country if i didn't like the laws
Getting arrested for speaking shit over twitter, even for racist jokes rubs me the wrong way, and i'm not even white.
@sortofnewbie It is my understanding that we all have freedom of speech, since always, however freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of consequences.
For example, for some hypothetical reason, i could go to town square and say bad things publicly about the people passing by, and most likely there would be at least one person willing to break my nose.
According to me, depending of the situation, of the scenario, throughout time and space there were, are and going to be different levels of freedom of consequences, thus freedom of speech.
For example, if You have stated and expressed Your own honest opinion regarding somebody is a lot less offensive than stating a general opinion about generalized group or subgroup of people, normally depending on the target group or person magnitude.
You know, unicast, multicast, anycast, broadcast communication ranging, since all of that expression is basically communication, which means influence.
I totally don't know the details of Your current case, however You are using VPS services from a provider, You have accepted their terms of service and according to their terms if they don't want You to do something, then You must stop doing it.
I suppose they normally, are most likely interested into running their own business as smooth as possible and it looks like they regard Your published text as a potential bump on the road for their business that could harm their company in some way or another, now or in the future.
My advice to You is to take down Your content from the current VPS provider, reconsider if all that You have stated is proper and if the risk of posting it again pays off, if You decide to post it again - use another provider, and see how it goes from there.
Bottom line, speech (even in public text form) is a form of communication, communication is influence, and the wide range of influences depends on the situation, it all depends on Your current standing reference point and a wide range of hierarchical connected factors.
Sigh
Legal right != moral right
Yes, not necessarily all rights and responsibilities are on paper.
I think that on paper are the basics from what's morally accepted, and all that's morally accepted as a whole, at a given point in time and space, is the average behavior of the current group of people, generated and regulated by people, iteratively.
If you break the VPS's provider TOS (copyright issues etc.) then he can shut down your vps. But not if you write things of another provider, even if you brake the law by insulting him. If you break the law with your post that concerns the person that asked your provider to shut you down and in no way your provider. The provider cannot be the police or the courts. If the tech guy you say you wrote a bad review about thinks that you break the law, then he has to go to a police station to sue you and let the court decide of you actually break the law.
Bottom line: pack your stuff and get away as soon as possible fron the vps provider you are with. He seems to act like a sheriff in the wild west, getting law in his hands. he has nothing to do with that, there are courts and juries for that.
Incorrect. It involves whoever was assigned the IP allocation and at the least, their problems are the provider's problems. If you don't have in your TOS that you can terminate on your own discretion, you're setting yourself up for failure. Don't leave loopholes or people will exploit them eventually. It's one thing to not know you're hosting illegal content, another when you've been made aware. If it's illegal, of course.
FTFY
I really feel his blackmailing his provider. Why not showing the post? Get a backup and post you blog here.
@c0y In Greece, you can sue somebody without a lawyer, just with a statement in a police station. The statement examined by investigator and he decides if the case should go to court or declined. If goes court, then you have to hire a lawyer to represent you to the court. (Of course, for big cases you can use lawyer to charge the sue)
Something that I claim it's illegal because it insults me, does not have to be illegal in real. It has to be proven by authorities if it's illegal or not. Or else, the provider is taking the law into in his hand.
Totally agree. But the op claims he has not yet move his content from there and he afraid that provider will terminate the box. So, If all he is saying is real and there is not blackmailing, he has to show the community some facts about what he wrote to his blog. Besides, his blog is public, so, he will not reveal any government secret...
Either way good luck with your backups and finding a new provider!
@jvnadr is he hasn't take the backup, he's just foolish or Blackmailing
We've been contacted for that reason a few times. In all honesty, I usually don't read those emails once I realize it's a personal issue. I've forwarded them to clients in the past just so I can tell the complainer that the message has been passed on (so they stop emailing me). If it's not illegal, that's the end of it.
Dont you have any balls dude.
Humiliate them in public as they deserve
Use DigitalOcean.
Given the amount of time that has passed and how long it would have taken to show the content even the google cache etc I am now calling BS, the host was most likely acting well within the pre agreed terms of service and the @OP is not happy about it.
Rules to live by when buying hosting:
1) If you don't like it don't sign up.
2) If you did not read it don't complain.
3) If you have to wonder if something is OK you should probably ask first.
This guy is trying to sell a Ferrari after looking at it closely it a Volkswagen.
Sorry it took so long. I said I was going to sleep on it.
Here's the blog post in its original form, now on a WordPress site
http://vpsexperience.wordpress.com/2014/01/05/googler-speaks-out-on-manny-cardenas-and-second-class-citizens-at-the-plex/
Here's a link to a blog post explaining what happened with Digital Ocean, with screenshots of the communication that took place about ToS etc
http://vpsexperience.wordpress.com/2014/01/05/digital-ocean-threatened-to-shut-down-my-blog-if-i-didnt-remove-or-edit-a-blog-post/
My purpose in publishing this is not to humiliate but to educate myself and others about how ToS are interpreted. For example, the VPS provider that I used for this blog (Digital Ocean) promotes itself as a great place to setup a blog, so I thought it might be helpful for everyone to know how Digital Ocean applies its terms of service, otherwise people might waste a lot of time.
Anyways, let me know what you think. Thanks
Let me get this strait you talked to the guy on some random chat site, and then made blog post about his views without informing him at start of conversation that you are going to do that? Its like going to the bar, make conversation with some random drunk person and then make blog post revealing identity and when asked to delete post or at least hide identity of person you go to some kind of war and all this s**t.
Were you treated fairly? I would say yes, I'm not a lawyer but there are some things that people just should not do, and you did it.
Actually, I think it said in my blog post that I didn't plan on making a blog post out of the conversation until he provided me his response, therefore I couldn't warn him in advance that I was making a blog post.
But thanks for your opinion anyways.
You didn't comment on the fact that this guy said he didn't care about the blog post when asked about it, and the possibility that it was someone else who made the complaint.
Well like I said you should not post this guy name, that is my opinion and has nothing to do with TOS of any provider its common sense. Please notice this is first time I involve my self in any kind of drama on any forum.
About DO if they did track you down with IP, that was only thing that I personally don't agree with in there action. Part that he said he don't care about blog post, he could change his mind I guess. And are you sure that person you were talking to is the person you named in your post? Since I noticed you don't know each other, there could also be possibility that real person contacted DO, and not the one you spoke to.
I didn't see any problem with posting his name because he was already posting in a public forum.
It's just like taking something someone says on Twitter and republishing it elsewhere. If you post, you know it's in the public domain
I agree with this statement.
I think your blog post made something out of nothing. However, I see no grounds for termination or a removal request out of anything other than just that...request.
Be good to hear from DO that's for sure!
I don't think the host is wrong for their stance, and you're not in the wrong either, it's simply a preference of the way the host conducts their business and you should choose another host.
To give your host credit, they warned you and had dialogue about the issue. Some LEB's would seethe at you simply sucking up the time.
@Ricardo sure, the host can do what it wants I guess. But who's going to setup a blog on a VPS when the VPS provider can order you to remove a blog post anytime someone doesn't like it and complains about it.
Also, don't you think the VPS provider should ask the person complaining to speak to me directly, and at least verify that the person complaining is who he says he is? There was strong reason to believe the person complaining was a fake
Yes, you were treated fairly
Your 'proof' that it wasn't Travis, that he wasn't embarrassed, etc was all besides the point and can be viewed as a delaying tactic.
From a legal standpoint, you're running afoul of the cyberstalking laws since the initial interaction didn't involve you identifying yourself or your purpose of interview. If you had done so, this could have fallen under libel laws which could have granted indemity to Digital Ocean under 47 U.S.C. sec. 230. For people who report on facts (e.g. posted twitters) it can fall under either law - the distinguishing factor being whether you've been focusing on the victim (your only post on the blog BTW) or whether you have a history of being less discriminatory.
Cyberstalking/Cyberharassment laws aren't as mature as libel and are mostly done at a state level. New York doesn't really have one and it falls under Aggravated harassment in the second degree under the New York Penal Law § 240.30 There's no out for an ISP hence why TOS against harassment has to be enforced by them or they risk being a party to it.
I think you'd be met with a similar response by any public/VC funded entity that has lawyers on staff.
@tchen I am afraid you have misunderstood the situation. The comments being posted by 'Travis Collins' prior to the OPs blog post were on a public site in full public view. The OP has merely quoted him and gave his own opinion on what had been said.
This doesn't violate 'Travis Collins' right to privacy as his comments were already in the public domain. If 'Travis Collins' didn't want these comments on the internet then he should never have made them in the first place.
Example, imagine I tweet Justin Bieber or Leonardo DiCaprio and happen to get a tweet back, I can't be punished for retweeting or discussing that tweet because the person in question has openly and freely conveyed an opinion or feeling on the internet. I am free to do talk about that all I want.
In this case, it would appear that DigitalOcean have taken a side without any investigation at all.
"Officer, that man has an iPhone 5S that he stole from me however I don't think you need to question him or verify the validity of my claim so you should just put him straight in prison without a fair trial."