Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by crusso 4758 days ago
Yes, this article is absolutely horrible by coming to the opposite of the correct conclusion.

How could an attorney parsing the documents not notice the "in connection with operating the Hosting Service" stipulation?

Further, Bitbucket and Github are opposite in terms of the freedom you have to control your FREE repositories. Github forces your free repositories to be open to the public. Bitbucket allows you to keep some free repositories private.

2 comments

The wording "in connection with" is specifically considered in the article. Also, here is the definition for "Hosted Services" (it's extremely broad):

1.2 What's Included in "Hosted Services". "Hosted Services" include any Atlassian online services products that End User orders, which can include "OnDemand" versions of many Atlassian Software products, the Bitbucket hosting service ("Bitbucket"), and other online services provided by Atlassian. "Hosted Services" always means the version of the Hosted Services as described in Atlassian's then-current product descriptions. End User's detailed rights to use Hosted Services are in Section 3 below.

Atlassian provide a lot of services which can be used in conjunction with one another. They probably use similar wording across their suite so that they are able to allow interaction between products etc.

I'm not sure where you got that quote from, but it's used exactly here: http://www.atlassian.com/end-user-agreement/ So yes, it's used across their suite, and doesn't seem overly broad in that case.

"In order to keep our prices low, we sold the contents of some private repositories" counts as 'in connection with operating the Hosting Service'. The author's problem is that the wording isn't particularly specific and can be used in a number of ways.