Because for many people, proper data handling is a hard requirement without which a product is useless.
In addition, not having an imprint is actually in breach of German law — I'd add that ASAP or you'll get a nastygram from some zealous automated lawyer bot.
I check for them too. It’s a credibility signal if a proper ToS, privacy statement and imprint exist. If they don’t exist, it appears as if the creators have something to hide.
The regulatory requirements to build software are extremely low. If someone can’t even comply with the basics, it’s a bad signal.
If it's obvious that the product won't get approved by risk management due do missing essential policies, I won't even take a glance at the actual product.
Automatisch would be interesting for me exactly due to:
> It allows you to store your data on your own servers, which is essential for businesses that handle sensitive user information and cannot risk sharing it with external cloud services. This is especially relevant for industries such as healthcare and finance, as well as for European companies that must comply with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
But automatisch.io doesn't include any data protection policies despite advertising a paid enterprise offering on their website and asking for data in a typeform. Also, there is only a copyright symbol without any link to a legal entity.
If it was just a non-profit open source package, I'd still look into it. But as it is, the website screams „don't touch this with a ten foot pole“ from a perspective of someone who is supposed to be the target group of your product ;)
In addition, not having an imprint is actually in breach of German law — I'd add that ASAP or you'll get a nastygram from some zealous automated lawyer bot.