Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : Web Hosting : "File dump site" restricitions apply?

[roguetech]

I'm looking for a new webhost and reading through many TOS (and AUP) pages and not having much luck. I use my webspace to share non-public files on occasion. Would this technically be a "file dump site"?

I know many hosts wouldn't count a few files here and there as being a big deal, but I don't want to purchase hosting from somewhere that suggests what I do is somehow wrong, or feel I'm cheating some company.

Any suggestions on hosts that allow storing files in the webspace would be welcome.

As a side-note to any providers who may read this, read through your policies... I've seen pretty stupid clauses, like "not allow ... file storage". If I'm not allowed to store files, then it's going to be a pretty boring website, consisting of a 404 page. Maybe I'm weird, but I'm not considering any hosts with such broad language.

[ITEHosting]

Greetings,

Can't say I know to many personally, but if you check the webhosting/shared hosting board maybe there is someone there who can point you in the right direction. I know for a fact that this is against most company policies, because they don't want their space used up by someone who wants to just host files. However, a select few hosts around here do allow it, and have rather cheap hosting plans.

First off, do you have any specifications? it would be helpful to see what exactly you are looking for. How much Disk Space/Bandwidth do you think you would need per month? Have you considered other options? Such as getting a cheap VPS and hosting there?

There are many factors that may help you out a lot regarding companies allowing you to do something or not. Some hosts are flexible, while some just sit and don't budge at all. Maybe if you inquire about it, they may make an exception for you, you never know. Good luck on your journey

[NoSupportLinuxHostin]

Most web hosts want to host normal websites, not large file archives. In a normal website, there typically are no large private files. If you have a large file archive, you need to search for a file archive hosting service instead of a standard web hosting service.

[roguetech]

I'm sure most hosts would be fine with my personal practices, which isn't backing up my hard drive or anything. But when a company says that they won't allow what I do, I'm not going to bet that they don't catch me or trust a sales represenative saying "should be okay", while it's in writting that it's not.

These things are ridiculous. "File dump site" seems to be generic language, but the specific host I was asking about I have rejected since it forbids a "connection to a network outside of the Services" and "any...link to... material that is not owned by the Customer". So no one view the site, and can't link other sites, strictly speaking.

I'm looking for 2GB or so, with about the same bandwidth (I don't use much bandwidth). Multiple domains. I'm also looking for a host that has forums (shows good customer service, if they have a public forums). And TOS and AUP that doesn't forbid having a website and/or using a website. My budget was limited, but with every host I reject, I become more willing to pay for an honest host.

[MikeDVB]

It varies from provider to provider - you're more likely to have issues with providers that offer unlimited disk space as they tend to always be looking for accounts "over the limit". I would contact the potential providers and ask them what they suggest after you explain to them what you're wanting to do.

[roguetech]

Originally Posted by NoSupportLinuxHostin

Most web hosts want to host normal websites, not large file archives. In a normal website, there typically are no large private files. If you have a large file archive, you need to search for a file archive hosting service instead of a standard web hosting service.

I've seem some TOS's that limit file size. I don't have any large files, so that would be fine. I've also seen limits on the number of files, and although it's silly, so long as it wouldn't affect my usage, that's fine too. Not sure what the definition of a "dump site" is, but I'm not going to buy hosting from somewhere that forbids files in general. I admit I'm being picky, but if a company can't say what they mean in their TOS, then I don't want to do business with them.

[MikeDVB]

A dump site is something like rapidshare, or imagebucket (but for files instead of images). As long as you're not running something like that you should be fine.

[ITEHosting]

Originally Posted by roguetech

I've seem some TOS's that limit file size. I don't have any large files, so that would be fine. I've also seen limits on the number of files, and although it's silly, so long as it wouldn't affect my usage, that's fine too. Not sure what the definition of a "dump site" is, but I'm not going to buy hosting from somewhere that forbids files in general. I admit I'm being picky, but if a company can't say what they mean in their TOS, then I don't want to do business with them.

That is exactly the way most people see it. These larger hosting companies have nothing better to do with their time than just come up with these ways of manipulating people that they think have no idea what they are really doing and it's something that(not just me) but allot of people are sick of. I absolutely hate liars and when a hosting company tells you that you can have all the space in the world, but wont let you use it for what you want to use it for, then there is a problem.

As far as I am concerned; the client should not be limited by a company just because they have a big legal team to back them up and to carefully go though there TOS and eliminate any dangers of getting sued, so that they can go make them self's rich over Lies, and false aculizations.

[MikeDVB]

Originally Posted by ITEHosting

That is exactly the way most people see it. These larger hosting companies have nothing better to do with their time than just come up with these ways of manipulating people that they think have no idea what they are really doing and it's something that(not just me) but allot of people are sick of. I absolutely hate liars and when a hosting company tells you that you can have all the space in the world, but wont let you use it for what you want to use it for, then there is a problem.

While I do have a problem with offering unlimited and then limiting their disk usage for arbitrary reasons (i.e. most sites aren't bigger than 5gb) then that's certainly an issue and I agree with you there.

But the thing is that just because they tell you what you can and cannot do does not make them liars. As an example - they tell you that you cannot run a ShoutBox because it tends to be too resource intensive, or you can't run an IRC Bot - those are definitely legitimate limitations that really have nothing to do with how much space you're actually using.

As far as limitations on the number of files - an account with 50~250,000 files can definitely put a strain on a backup system and it can (and I've seen it happen) cause File System issues for a server resulting in potential data loss and definitely downtime for everybody on the server. If this is a limitation of a provider you're looking at and this limitation is going to be an issue for you then I suggest you simply move on to the next provider in your list.

Originally Posted by ITEHosting

As far as I am concerned; the client should not be limited by a company just because they have a big legal team to back them up and to carefully go though there TOS and eliminate any dangers of getting sued, so that they can go make them self's rich over Lies, and false aculizations.

I doubt most providers have big legal teams but that's really beside the point. The Terms of Service are in place to not only protect the provider but to also protect the performance of the servers. There are of course going to be providers that put silly limitations in their Terms of Service but then all you have to do is vote with your wallet by not signing up with them.

[Quartz]

Originally Posted by roguetech

I'm also looking for a host that has forums (shows good customer service, if they have a public forums).

Just because a host has forums doesn't instantly make them credible, or have good customer service. I see where you are going with this, but it is a pretty limiting requirement as many hosts simply do not care much for maintaining something that generally has little impact on or to their overall business structure.

If this isn't a definite requirement, all is good, otherwise I'd reconsider this if it is. Just my two cents on that matter.

[roguetech]

Originally Posted by Quartz

Just because a host has forums doesn't instantly make them credible, or have good customer service. I see where you are going with this, but it is a pretty limiting requirement as many hosts simply do not care much for maintaining something that generally has little impact on or to their overall business structure.

If this isn't a definite requirement, all is good, otherwise I'd reconsider this if it is. Just my two cents on that matter.

Not a requirement, but makes it easier to pick between a zillion hosts.

[MikeDVB]

Originally Posted by roguetech

Not a requirement, but makes it easier to pick between a zillion hosts.

There are many factors that can make picking easier but the fact of the matter is there are "a zillion" [or more] hosts and it takes time and effort and adequate research to find a good one.

No matter who you choose and what they promise - always maintain your own off-provider backups!