Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
Michael W Lucas¹ :flan_mail:

@q3k

"You hereby grant to Vultr a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, fully paid-up, worldwide license (including the right to sublicense through multiple tiers) to use, reproduce, process, adapt, publicly perform, publicly display, modify, prepare derivative works, publish, transmit and distribute each of your User Content, or any portion thereof, in any form, medium or distribution method now known or hereafter existing, known or developed, and otherwise use and commercialize the User Content in any way that Vultr deems appropriate, without any further consent, notice and/or compensation to you or to any third parties, for purposes of providing the Services to you."

3 comments
q3k :blobcatcoffee:

@mwl Yes, “for purposes of providing the Services to you”.

Michael W Lucas¹ :flan_mail:

@q3k that's not attached to that statement.

I read lots of contracts. The placement of that statement is important.

q3k :blobcatcoffee:

@mwl So do I, and I disagree ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

EDIT: A bit more detail:

1. The ordinary (grammatical) reading of this sentence clearly qualifies the grant to be 'for purposes of ...'.
2. The reading of the entire contract (especially the rest of section 12) shows the intent that Vultr does not want anything to do with your content, let alone to license it for their own use.
3. Contra Proferentem

These are standard rules of contract interpretation, both under US/English contract law and under PECL.

@mwl So do I, and I disagree ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

EDIT: A bit more detail:

1. The ordinary (grammatical) reading of this sentence clearly qualifies the grant to be 'for purposes of ...'.
2. The reading of the entire contract (especially the rest of section 12) shows the intent that Vultr does not want anything to do with your content, let alone to license it for their own use.
3. Contra Proferentem

Go Up