Loading Profile...
Is there a pricing option for non-profit organizations?
1 person has this question
I have this question, too!
Tell me when someone answers.
The more people who ask this question, the more it gets noticed.
The more people who ask this question, the more it gets noticed.
The best answers from the company
-
Oh, bah.
The linked-to thread (by a singular, anonymous, and inflammatory blog commenter with unknown business allegiances) alleges that PBwiki is going to run off with a business's data despite having a very explicit confidentiality clauses showing we're not and somehow veers off into a rather non-sensical rant about how putting your company's logo on PBwiki would invalidate your trademark. It's the kind of deliberately near-libelous pap other companies would sue over.
If a user makes a PBwiki public and asks PBwiki to share that wiki with the world, PBwiki needs to have the right to actually share that data. Otherwise someone could upload an essay they wrote, instruct PBwiki to share that essay with a friend, and then sue PBwiki for infringing the essay / disclosing intellectual property. (People have actually pulled this kind of crap, amazingly.) So the permission we ask for is the permission to do what you mean, to operate the service in the way you expect.
This is all kind of like putting a warning on a car that says "You acknowledge that if you step on the gas, the car will accelerate. If you accelerate into other people or obstacles, it's your own damned fault."
(And no, our business model does not consist of misappropriating stage plays published on public wikis by our users and turning them into fabulous and slightly provocative Broadway works that gross millions.)
3 people say
this answers the question
-
Hi Casey:
Yes, there are special pricing options for non-profits.
To qualify for these and discuss the options, email me directly at :
tom (AT) pbwiki (DOT) com.
The company and 1 other person say
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Hi Casey:
Yes, there are special pricing options for non-profits.
To qualify for these and discuss the options, email me directly at :
tom (AT) pbwiki (DOT) com.
The company and 1 other person say
this answers the question
-
-
-
Inappropriate?Google also owns 100% of your data if you use them:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Greenbaum/?p=151
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Greenbaum/?p=156 -
Inappropriate?As long as we're digressing into opinions: Using PBWiki is highly risky for any business
-
Inappropriate?Oh, bah.
The linked-to thread (by a singular, anonymous, and inflammatory blog commenter with unknown business allegiances) alleges that PBwiki is going to run off with a business's data despite having a very explicit confidentiality clauses showing we're not and somehow veers off into a rather non-sensical rant about how putting your company's logo on PBwiki would invalidate your trademark. It's the kind of deliberately near-libelous pap other companies would sue over.
If a user makes a PBwiki public and asks PBwiki to share that wiki with the world, PBwiki needs to have the right to actually share that data. Otherwise someone could upload an essay they wrote, instruct PBwiki to share that essay with a friend, and then sue PBwiki for infringing the essay / disclosing intellectual property. (People have actually pulled this kind of crap, amazingly.) So the permission we ask for is the permission to do what you mean, to operate the service in the way you expect.
This is all kind of like putting a warning on a car that says "You acknowledge that if you step on the gas, the car will accelerate. If you accelerate into other people or obstacles, it's your own damned fault."
(And no, our business model does not consist of misappropriating stage plays published on public wikis by our users and turning them into fabulous and slightly provocative Broadway works that gross millions.)
3 people say
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?"a singular, anonymous, and inflammatory blog commenter with unknown business allegiances"
This is called an ad hominem attack, and is usually "an indication that the opponent realizes that the argument itself is correct and cannot be refuted".
Perhaps a reasoned response, posted ay ZDNet, in reply to his well-thought exposition, is in order?
-
Inappropriate?Ah, but as you've helped me learn, GF, it's better not to feed the trolls. ;)
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE