|
|
|
|
|
by dictum
4697 days ago
|
|
There's no problem with banning products that use your service but violate your Terms of Service; it just doesn't jibe with what is usually understood by "open". "We're open"/"we encourage openness"/"our platform is open" implies acceptance, transparency, a warm welcome, permissiveness even. It kind of makes "open" another doublespeak term: we're Open, but terms and conditions apply... Of course we can have debates on the semantics of the word "open": should it be assumed to mean tolerance? Semantics aside, Google's "open" is marketing artifice, akin to Apple's many pompous adjectives for mundane or even inferior things ("beautiful", "revolutionary", "insanely great" etc.) or Microsoft's old message of empowerment ("where do you want to go today?") to sell an unremarkable but popular OS and productivity suite. |
|