Hey!

Would a few experienced hosting providers mind taking a look at my new TOS and AUP and pointing out any obvious holes?

I'd like to get these right before I start offering hosting services, and I figure that it's the hosters who've been burned by bad clients in the past that will have an idea of what's missing in these policies...

The URLs are:

http://www.jpwebworks.com.au/policies_tos.html
http://www.jpwebworks.com.au/policies_aup.html


Thanks very much for your feedback!

Jason

From reading over it, I didn't notice any obvious flaws. I think you would be better off talking to a laywer on this one though.

It's solid

No need for a lawyer ! ! !

Have you really been in business from 1996 ?

:rolleyes:

How about checking out other big companies policies and comparing them with yours? Just for checking whether essential information and points are made clear.

Maybe you should revise your NO-SPAM policies.

No PHPNuke?

Hey!

avara: thanks very much.

bahres: thanks for taking a look. And yes, I (personally) have been working with the Web since 1996. The jpwebworks company (of which I'm a director) was incorporated in 1999. Our main focus has been on web development, and our upcoming hosting services are an adjunct to that business.

sjau: I put together these policies based on those of about 12 other hosting companies. The issue I had with some of them, though, is that they're written in a very "legal" style. I can understand why that's so, but I wanted these docs to be a little easier to understand for the average client. Thanks for the pointer, though.

microsol: What do you think is missing in terms of the no-spam terms? I thought that "clients may not use the jpwebworks network to originate or distribute unsolicited commercial email or to host a web site referenced by such email" was quite clear... Any advice would be appreciated!


Jason

Hey!

MilkMan: I've read in these forums some discussion relating to security issues with PHPNuke. I've not used it myself, so I can only take the advice of others on that point... Do you disagree?

Thanks

Jason

Only thing I've experienced with it is the stability. Whenever an update is released, wait for other people to find the problems first.

Hey!

MilkMan: thanks - I'll look into it a bit further...

Jason

Originally posted by JayPee
I (personally) have been working with the Web since 1996. The jpwebworks company (of which I'm a director) was incorporated in 1999. You might want to consult with a lawyer on that phrase. If you do not clarify this distinction, you might be exposing yourself to some liability.

Hey!

bigmattyh: thanks, will do.

Jason

I may be wrong,
but I've heard many times that your policy should be written entirely with capitalized letters.

Sounds odd, but I tend to file this one in the same category as "(C) is not a valid manner of writing "Copyright".

Originally posted by JayPee
Hey!

MilkMan: I've read in these forums some discussion relating to security issues with PHPNuke. I've not used it myself, so I can only take the advice of others on that point... Do you disagree?

Thanks

Jason

Hi Jason,
the policy of no PHPnuke is very good. why?...

1) security issues (most important) take to long to resolve

2) resource usage. phpnuke is a hog, most people that stick to it make many database modification to make it streamline.

you should offer up postnuke as the alternitive choice.

1) Security problems are solved within the same day or 48hr ( never been more than 18 hr.s yet )

2) they keep on tightening the code up so it's anywhere from 10% to 30% faster that phpnuke

3) good thing about post nuke is that if you had to, you could do a global search and replace ( unix version ) of a file in question as long it's not the one with the database name and login id

Mike

Hey!

Mike - thanks. I'll look into PostNuke.

Jason