first draft of tos content to be linked to from tx metadata #19
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🔥
Just some comments @Christian-MK. I was skeptical about the TOS but reading this, it looks like it creates an important foundation for our business/business partners.
|
|
||
| You represent and warrant that you: (i) have the necessary technical expertise | ||
| and ability to review and evaluate the security, integrity and operation of any | ||
| Fact Tokens that you decide to acquire, sell or use; (ii) have the knowledge, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Fact Tokens that you decide to acquire, sell or use; (ii) have the knowledge, | |
| Feed Data that you decide to consume, request, relay, or use; (ii) have the knowledge, |
nb. placeholder for conversation, I feel their use of LINK might be synonymous with requesting/buying data using LINK so its function. While FACT's utility is still developed, we might want to keep this part of the TOS generic without overt references to what's may eventually exist.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
use of LINK might be synonymous with requesting/buying data
You read this correctly! Because we have long discussed a utility of FACT being its use for purchasing feed publication... I figured that we would also need to use this kind of language. With that said, I support changing the language to reflect the reality at present.
| Fact Tokens that you decide to acquire, sell or use; (ii) have the knowledge, | ||
| experience, understanding, professional advice and information to make your own | ||
| evaluation of the merits, risks and applicable compliance requirements under | ||
| Applicable Law of any Fact Token; and (iii) know, understand and accept the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Applicable Law of any Fact Token; and (iii) know, understand and accept the | |
| Applicable Law of any data made available through the Orcfax Network; and (iii) know, understand and accept the |
nb. placeholder per above.
| responsible for the execution or settlement of transactions between users of | ||
| Orcfax software or the Orcfax Network. | ||
|
|
||
| ## LIMITATION OF LIABILITY |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess this section is: "if you do sue us, the TOS makes it clear to you that you can have your money back (fees totaling no more than 12 months)?
^^ above my pay-grade - but does this mean we should escrow fees from parties for 12 months before use?
nb. also, do we need to specify something like, in the currency in which the fee was paid? e.g. if paid in ADA you get back equivalent ADA?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
TOS makes it clear to you that you can have your money back (fees totaling no more than 12 months)?
If someone were to sue, and was successful, the extent to which they could sue is limited to 12 mo worth of publication costs (is my understanding).
As for escrow... This is above my pay grade but I imagine Orcfax will need to have funds available to cover these kinds of situations. Otherwise it could be catastrophic for the company
also, do we need to specify something like, in the currency in which the fee was paid? e.g. if paid in ADA you get back equivalent ADA?
I imagine so. This is where a professional would be useful.
|
Nb. one way we might manage this url (to consider) is to ask Gabriel to setup a redirect (not sure which is the correct 3.x.x to return (maybe 303), and then it returns to this docs page. That would satisfy the easy to track in version control and easy to edit properties needed. |
This has been largely pulled from Chainlink's ToS.
Much has been left out, and the logic for why certain portions carried over (or not) is just from my own reading of their terms. The final version should likely be reviewed by someone competent in these details
EDIT (RS): Chainlink TOS Archive Snapshot: https://web.archive.org/web/20240712050437/https://chain.link/terms
Connected to: https://github.com/orcfax/issues/issues/186