Dear @deb, thanks for the explanations!
Some follow-up questions.
The clause in GitHubs Terms around user suspension is “boiler plate”
Have you considered alternatives to “may terminate for any reason”?
While it does seem common in Microsoft adjacent projects (such as GitHub which is a subsidiary of Microsoft), it does not seem to be general industry standard boilerplate to me. Compare, for instance, the similar terms in GitLab (a main competitor of GitHub, and not Microsoft owned):
“4.4 GitLab may suspend Customer’s access to the Software or Supplemental Services due to a Suspension Event. As applicable, GitLab will give Customer prior notice and a reasonable opportunity to resolve or otherwise cure the issue and avoid suspension. GitLab is not required to give prior notice in exigent circumstances, or for suspension of access to avoid material harm or violation of legal or regulatory requirements. Upon resolution of a Suspension Event, GitLab will promptly restore Customer’s access to the Software or Supplemental Services as applicable.”
See GitLab Subscription Agreement | The GitLab Handbook
To me, this reads much nicer!
At least I personally would prefer that one above the currently proposed termination clause, as it gives a normal user/maintainer like me:
(a) a mandatory explanation what the problem is and/or what they are accused of, together with an explanation of “what will happen”
(b) time and opportunity to remedy any issues
(c) most importantly, a much stronger guarantee that no unreasonable or unfair use will be made of the paragraph
What do you think, @deb - also, have alternatives like this been discussed?