cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/43801404
Following in the footsteps of Hashicorp, Hudson, etc. Zed has chosen to cash in the good will of its now substantial user base and start going to full corporate enshittification. Among other things like minimum age nonsense, they have also added binding mandatory opt-OUT arbitration.
I find such agreements very troubling, because it gives up public funded dispute resolution for private which nearly unanimously benefits larger entities, it lowers transparency to near zero, and eliminates the abilities to act as a class and to appeal. But I worry most will just accept it, as is the norm.
You can however opt out by emailing arbitration-opt-out@zed.dev with full legal name, the email address associated with your account, and a statement that you want to opt out.
I’ll just consider my days of advocating for Zed as an interesting new editor over and go back to Neovim bliss.
Never understood a terms of service existing if the project code license is GPL or such. Can’t this just be forked and cured of anti features, if people value it enough to do so?
Binding arbitration (aka, if we break the law you can’t sue us) aught to be illegal in every country.
It already happened: https://gram.liten.app/
Note that Zed has an Affero GPL, which limits others from competing with Zed Industries in the service space.
The zed-industries Github repository lists Zed licenses as AGPL, Apache and GPLv3.
The AGPL refers to the GNU Affero General Public license, which does not limit others from competing. Unless you mean the fact that forks must share source code when accessed over a network?
I mistakenly thought it was more restrictive, thanks.
Doesn’t the AGPL just say that you can’t keep your changes/improvements private? (honest question: I seem to recall so, but I’m not really sure)
It seems you’re right. I may be confusing it with another license.