@DickieSteele said in #99:
> I still find them all appalling so now I'm reconsidering, which is probably why I'm spending my Xmas days trying to understand the perspectives of people like Ender LOL.
I've got an eboard and it only works on Chess.com because the seller never bothered to implement Lichess 2FA.
@DickieSteele said in #95:
> > Microsoft do that for Outlook that way:
>
> That's a support page, not a TOS. It gives examples of browsers that are able to load Outlook pages, and doesn't give any guarantee that TOS won't be violated while using those browsers.
Mmm I was quite confident it was linked indirectly from ToS even if I can't find now.
Surely this apply for Google ToS:
https://play.google.com/intl/ALL_au/about/play-terms/
That have a section "Access to and Use of Content" in which they list compatible devices
https://support.google.com/googleplay/answer/1727131?hl=en
Precisely here the list
https://storage.googleapis.com/play_public/supported_devices.html
@DickieSteele said in #95:
> > From a brief search I found this page who explains how to write a ToS
> > ...
> > Technical Requirements: To use our Service, you need:
> > [List any specific device requirements]
>
> "device requirements" in that quote means what's required from a device, not which device is required. The device requirements are the the ability to use the Lichess website, app, or API, subject to all the rest of the TOS, eg: no automated moves on the website/app. A list of compliant third party devices wouldn't constitute device requirements.
>
I read device requirements as browser surely supported and which app are usable.
As in the previous example what Google did in list compatible device.
@DickieSteele said in #95:
> I'm more interested in what you think your proposed list would do to help solve the issue of what information should be given to users to help them determine which eboards (or any third party software/hardware) violate TOS.
It may basically tell users that if they use eBoard they risk ban.
So they know they have to check with the producers, and it's not 100% a safe solution, but at the same time they know ways 100% safe to play.
@Toadofsky said in #100:
> > So we agreed here.
> > End user in a regulated market is not responsible for a legally sold product that is discovered after that doesn't abide to regulations due to producer overlooked them.
>
> There are other legally sold products, like cars or guns. But in the case of computers and chess, where is the government entity to enforce anticheat regulations?
>
Are you kidding me? That's was nowhere near what I am saying.
If (for example) you sold me an electronic device claiming it's fine to use in a platform, while in reality it breaks the ToS of such platforms the product is considered faulty at best, and a fraud in worst case scenario..
I am not talking about anti cheating I am talking that in a regulated market product have to comply to how they present themselves.
No one should sold a product presenting it differently from what it's, hiding defects and/or risks for end user.
> @Ender88 said in #98:
> > > @Ender88 said in #92:
> > > > So are you telling me there is no safe way to use Lichess?
> > >
> > > Obviously, if you read it that's what it says. Lichess is an online service on the internet.
> >
> > Sorry explain it in simple terms.
> > What have I to do to play chess on Lichess without breaching the ToS?
> > IMHO this question have an answer, put such answers in ToS would be great
>
> Abide by https://lichess.org/terms-of-service -- but there is always risk when dealing with the internet and online services.
AFAK if end user can't possibly remove risks of ToS breach then ToS may be considered vexatious to the user and then voidable.
Again just my opinion.
@DickieSteele said in #99:
> It's the pointlessness of his list that has me curious though. His ideal list seemingly wouldn't include any eboards. The example lists he's given are just like "compatible browser: Edge, Opera, Chrome and Firefox. Use third party tool and extensions at your own risk." I'd like to know what thought process could lead a person to think that would do something to help negate the issue that was being discussed.
>
The issue discussed in this topic at beginning is that the OP wasn't aware of any risks, because he can't understand technical language (as API is) and therefore foresee any possible issue.
But a simple list can't be misunderstood and in my option meet the criteria of clarity needed.
@DickieSteele said in #99:
> I think I must just accept that he can't give any rationale for his expectations.
Not only I have given my rationale, again and again and again..
I also give you example of ToS that are made the way I thought and a post about a company that explains why it's a good idea.
You disagree I understand, but please consider to provide some material to corroborate your opinion, as I did.
@Ender88 said in #103:
> Are you kidding me? That's was nowhere near what I am saying.
> If (for example) you sold me an electronic device claiming it's fine to use in a platform, while in reality it breaks the ToS of such platforms the product is considered faulty at best, and a fraud in worst case scenario..
> I am not talking about anti cheating I am talking to point out user safe products to interact with the platform.
If I sold you an electronic device and you didn't use it, what is the issue? Of course you are conflating commerce with ToS.
@Ender88 said in #103:
> AFAIK if end user can't possibly remove risks of ToS breach then ToS may be considered vexatious to the user and then voidable.
> Again just my opinion.
This is why comments ago I suggested making your own chess site and showing us a better way to do things.
@Toadofsky said in #101:
> I've got an eboard and it only works on Chess.com because the seller never bothered to implement Lichess 2FA.
Mine would've been the other way round. I'd pretty much designed the entire UI and, when logging in to an online platform, it would basically tell the user that they'll be using Lichess because the other one's Connected Board API doesn't meet [my company's] standards for quality.
Even their official current eboard partner has had vastly more luck making their board work well with Lichess than with Chess-com ROFL
@Toadofsky said in #105:
> This is why comments ago I suggested making your own chess site and showing us a better way to do things.
And this time it still your opinion or a Lichess official statement?
Because I find a great and mature way to deal with different options in feedback section, by a staf member..
@Toadofsky said in #105:
> > Are you kidding me? That's was nowhere near what I am saying.
> > If (for example) you sold me an electronic device claiming it's fine to use in a platform, while in reality it breaks the ToS of such platforms the product is considered faulty at best, and a fraud in worst case scenario..
> > I am not talking about anti cheating I am talking to point out user safe products to interact with the platform.
>
> If I sold you an electronic device and you didn't use it, what is the issue? Of course you are conflating commerce with ToS.
If you sold me an electronic device not compliant with how it's presented, could very likely end up to be considered a scam despite the fact I use it or not.
Really I have to say that?
@Ender88 said in #107:
> > This is why comments ago I suggested making your own chess site and showing us a better way to do things.
>
> And this time it still your opinion or a Lichess official statement?
> Because I find a great and mature way to deal with different options in feedback section, by a staf member..
Ideas are great.
https://youtu.be/LZgyVadkgmI?t=1546
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.