search

wireapp / wire

:wavy_dash: Overview of the open source code for Wire
https://wire.com
GNU General Public License v3.0
2.39k stars 173 forks source link

Alter TOS to allow for bridges #340

Open tuxayo opened 4 years ago

tuxayo commented 4 years ago

The terms of service (TOS) are too restrictive to allow it. The proposal it to relax them to at least allow bridges.

7.2 Accessing the Service. You agree not to access, or attempt to access, the Service by any means other than through the Site or the Apps. You specifically agree not to access, or attempt to access, the Service through any automated means (including, without limitation, through the use of scripts, bots, unauthorized third party apps, spiders or web crawlers).

This issue is based on #160 were the discussions are focused on bridges federation.

edit: fixed above writing error

dwt commented 3 years ago

As all the components are open source, and therefore it is quite possible to build a bridge to wire from the community, this is (to my understanding) the blocker that prevents that.

Is there a specific reason you don't want to allow bridges? It doesn't seem to be a technical problem?

arianvp commented 2 years ago

The word "Apps" in section 7.2 also refers to any "Independent Apps" (As per Section 1.2)

1.2 You may compile the open source software that we make available from time to time to develop your own mobile, desktop or web application. We refer to that application as an “Independent App”. This ToU does not apply to any Independent App and you are free to utilize and exploit your Independent App in any manner in which you determine and that is permitted by the license under which he source code was published. However, if you desire to cause your Independent App to utilize and connect to our servers for any purposes, then, as a condition to your use of our servers and network infrastructure, your Independent App must comply with and may only be used in accordance with this ToU. Any reference in this ToU to an “App” includes any Independent App that connects to our servers for any purposes.

Furthermore there are some extra restrictions to "Independent Apps" in section 6.4:

6.4 Independent Apps. If you desire to cause your Independent App to utilize and connect to our servers for any purposes, then, as a condition to your use of our servers and network infrastructure, your Independent App must comply with and may only be used in accordance with this ToU. Additionally, certain additional restrictions apply to any such App, as follows:

a. You agree not to change the way the Independent App connects and interacts with our servers;

b. You agree not to weaken any of the security features of the Independent App;

c. You agree not to use our servers to store data for purposes other than the intended and original functionality of our source code underlying your Independent App; d. You acknowledge that you are solely responsible for any and all updates to your Independent App. For clarity, if you compile the open source software that we make available from time to time to develop your own mobile, desktop or web application, and do not cause that application to connect to our servers for any purposes, then that Independent App will not be limited under this ToU and this ToU will not apply to that application.

I'm not good at interpreting legal speak, so I'll leave it up to you to interpret these quotes as you see fit and ask any follow-up questions. What else would need to be added or altered to allow bridge?

strypey commented 1 week ago

IANAL, but based on my experiences with startups, here's my attempt to read the tea leaves on this ...

I'm guessing the Wire folks have saved money on legal fees by finding a boilerplate ToS for a centralised network service, and running a search-and-replace to insert "Wire" where it says "Service Name", and so on. Then getting a lawyer to give it a quick once-over, to ensure that it protects them from any and all liability, to the extent legally possible in the jurisdiction(s) where they are headquartered.

I'm also guessing that any changes to the ToS would risk opening up liability loopholes, like failing to explicitly forbid Bad Actors from compromising their servers, so they would require another once-over from a legal professional. Which would cost them money, for no significant commercial advantage (potentially the opposite).

Whatever the reasons, I can totally understand the Wire crew not wanting to spend admin time on this. Even if they are open to well-intentioned people using other services and networks to talk to people using Wire. Even if they are (in theory) willing to change the ToS to formally allow that, and even though I doubt they're going to prosecute anyone for running non-mischievous bridges. Especially in the current regulatory climate (DMA/ DSA in the EU, massive antitrust actions against tech gatekeepers in the US).

But bottom line, if you want to run a bridge to Wire;

As an aside to the Wire crew, if my guess is even vaguely correct, there may be options other than paying a lawyer yourselves. As I pointed out to the Amethyst dev, many software freedom groups (eg SFLC, SFC) and other digital rights organisations (eg EFF) retain lawyers, whose job is to be experts in any areas of law impacting on software and internet services. There's a good chance they'd be willing to provide pro bono legal advice to facilitate greater interoperation between online services if they publish full source code under freedom-respecting licenses (as do Wire, Signal, most Matrix and XMPP apps, and others). Just an idea. (I don't speak for anyone but myself and I can't afford to retain a lawyer either, more's the pity).