Timeline for Does Stack Exchange have a responsibility to protect the rights of their volunteers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 12, 2019 at 8:19 | comment | added | Danilo |
And as such, any obligations described by ToS aren't binding and SO can /and will enforce them so it benefit them mostly, and since they aren't binding you can't ask for reimbursement from the company if some rules of obligations are broken by the company. And as I mentioned in conclusion These types of contracts aren't necessary bad or evil. It is necessary and perfectly reasonable. Harmless? That depends on who is running the company and where does the benefit lies.
|
|
| Dec 12, 2019 at 8:16 | comment | added | Danilo | Quite opposite, it is company binding the employee, and as such employee can't further more bind someone else to the company by proxy in any manner. If you are employed at A, any deal you might have with me isn't necessarily binding, for it to become binding I company must sign new contract with me. So in that case what does line aforementioned mean: It doesn't describe binding process, it describes an obligations that users/mods must perform for the companies benefit, but as the obligations aren't binding (aka you can't bind company by yourself) the obligations are loosely regulated. | |
| Dec 12, 2019 at 8:12 | comment | added | Danilo | Completly true, but don't take it out of context. Sure you can not bind company to some form of obligation but it isn't tied to duly-delegated employees. Since even employee can't bind company. No one can bind company except executives and/or board of directors. Think about what binding means. In any form of definition it describes an 2 way obligations that parties have agreed upon. When you enter an working relationship (volunteer or payed) your employer sets a couple of obligations on your behalf such as working hours, free days, payed free days... etc. This isn't employe binding the company | |
| Dec 11, 2019 at 15:49 | comment | added | Nathan Tuggy | As I understand it, "I have no authority to bind Stack Exchange Inc. in any manner." means something quite different from your interpretation. Instead, it means that the moderator, unlike duly-delegated employees, cannot sign a binding contract on behalf of SE that SE must then honor. As such, it's a perfectly reasonable, necessary, harmless provision. (Explanation 1, explanation 2) | |
| Nov 12, 2019 at 14:50 | comment | added | Danilo | Honestly, I have nothing to add. I appreciate that you mention jurisdiction. And I think we both agree that it is highly taxing and expensive to even approach that without in depth knowledge of law of country the case is prosecuted on. | |
| Nov 12, 2019 at 14:46 | comment | added | Helmar | cf. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extradition#Own_citizens | |
| Nov 12, 2019 at 14:45 | comment | added | Helmar | I was talking about the much easier way. I can sue an American company following American laws in an American court. They can sue me following German laws in a German court. | |
| Nov 12, 2019 at 14:43 | comment | added | Helmar | Oh, extradition is another issue. Most countries don't extradite their own citizens. Extradition agreements are usually about giving the other country their citizens back. E.g. due to such agreements American citizens who are being sued in America would be extradited by Germany back to America. (However, even that usually only works if the corpus delicti is a crime in both countries and the punishment is "legal" according to both jurisdictions. That's why US citizens expecting capital punishment in the US might just apply for asylum in other countries.) | |
| Nov 12, 2019 at 14:19 | comment | added | Danilo | You can sue whomever whatever you like as long as you are on same footing, but just because you can do it, it doesn't mean that you are able to. But if someone wants to push for some regulations, that someone needs to make an best defense in their favor, and since one person can't fight an corporation and win, I suggested that union/guild is best way to make good foundations to do so and have higher chance to win. | |
| Nov 12, 2019 at 14:17 | comment | added | Danilo | *extriction = extrudiction What I wished to show (and not tell) is that SO has valid response to any payment regulations with "Our users are world wide, so implementing any regulation is impossible to do since .... " and therefore appeal any ruling on international court to waste time, do a SLAPP suit or whatever to make anyone willing to do something that against companies interest life difficult and financial expensive endeavor. And I do agree with you that in general there is no rule prohibiting that, but it isn't cost effective, and I never said that it isn't possible. | |
| Nov 12, 2019 at 14:11 | comment | added | Danilo | @Helmar Gutten tag! :D That is true, since Germany (as part of EU) as extrication obligation (rule/treaty ... whatever) with USA. But someone from Russia or African continent ... it is different - but that is often dependent on trading relationship between countries (or federations) which is another can of worms I would rather not open. | |
| Nov 12, 2019 at 13:00 | comment | added | Helmar | The whole citizen thing doesn't really apply. As a German citizen I could very well be both sued by an American company as well as sue one. It's more of a hassle either way, but there's no general rule prohibiting that. | |
| Nov 4, 2019 at 3:06 | history | edited | Laurel | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
grammar fixes
|
| Nov 4, 2019 at 1:36 | history | answered | Danilo | CC BY-SA 4.0 |