These are not the terms and conditions of this blog. Rather, the aim of this contract is to protect myself, the author of this blog, from legal clauses which I consider unethical.
It has come to my attention that "Click-Through" and "Browse-Through" agreements, those walls of legalese text followed by an "I agree" button and those "terms and conditions" links hidden at the bottom of web pages, are legally binding. I object to this.
By sending messages to my email address, you (the service provider) agree not to enforce the one-sided clauses of any contract you have imposed to me (the service user) through "Click-Through", "Browse-Through", and similar large pieces of legal text which the average user skips or ignores. In return, I agree not to abuse your service in any way. Common sense shall be used in deciding which clauses are one-sided and which actions are considered abuse.
For example, insisting that all legal disputes shall be handled by the justice system in which the service provider is located would be a one-sided clause. A clause insisting that legal disputes shall be handled by the justice system of the defendant, however, would not be one-sided, since either the user or the service provider could be the defendant.
An example of abusing a service would be for the user of a free service to take advantage of this free service in order to create a premium version of that free service, which the user would then sell to other users. In contrast, using a free service without paying would not constitute abuse, since the service explicitly advertises itself as being free to use.