Reasons Not to Use Google (2015)

I also would easily believe these users probably didn't just buy a phone, and likely were using their personal Gmail account as a defacto business account - Pixel Arbitrage, as it were. In that light, banning the account outright makes some sense, even if it feels heavy-handed.

> Such an arrangement is against Google’s terms of service, which state that customers “may only purchase Devices for your personal use [and] may not commercially resell any Device”

While you could certainly argue that's a ToS for the use of the store (not for the product itself), it's up to Google to identify resellers and not sell to them. If they fail to identify a customer as a reseller -- or hell, someone buys the phone and only later on decides to commercially resell it, or to sell it to a commercial reseller -- tough luck. That's just the first-sale doctrine at work.

Google taking punitive action against people who get away with this may not literally be "enforcing terms of service on a physical product", but it's muddy enough that I don't think the distinction matters. (Regardless, I think it's a big stretch to connect the ToS for store purchases to an entire Google account.) In any case, it's an incredibly scummy thing to do.

> may not commercially resell any Device”. (Emphasis mine)

The commercially reselling is probably in reference to buying a product for the sole purpose of reselling that product[0]. Of course, I'm no lawyer so maybe I'm completely misinterpreting that.

[0]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840...

You can actually do that, although it is limited somewhat by the rule against perpetuities (RAP). The classic statement of the RAP is that no interest is good unless it must vest, if at all, not later that 21 years after some life in being at the creation of the interest.

For example, suppose you have three children and you own a small farm but do not live on it. You've got an arrangement with Farmer Bob that lets him and his family live on the farm and run it, and you get 20% of the profits.

In your will you could leave the farm to Bob for the rest of his life and then to your children and that would be fine. Bob's interest, if it vests, does so when you die, and that's within 21 years of your life and you were alive when the interest was created, so no RAP violation. You childrens' interests, if they vest, do so when Bob dies, which is within 21 years of Bob's life, and Bob is alive now so again RAP is satisfied.

So when you die the farm goes to Bob. When Bob dies it goes to your children (or if they are dead then it goes to whoever inherited their interest). (For those wondering what happens if Bob tries to sell the farm after he inherits it--he can, but he can only sell what he has which is an interest that terminates when he dies. That interest still terminates when he dies even if at the time someone else owns that interest).

In a majority of US states they have modified the classic common law RAP, replacing the within 21 years of a life now in existence with a flat 90 years. Some states have gone even longer in some circumstances, such as Florida which for trusts upped it to 360 years and then 1000 years. A handful of states have abolished the RAP.

Leave your stuff in a trust when you die and live in one of those states and you can dictate what happens to your estate for generations after you are gone.

and there's a couple of client & server implementations https://jmap.io/software.html

but it's a long long way from popular yet AFAICT from the lack of support from the big hosted mail providers other than fastmail.

Its been released & in use for years. (Nearly a decade at this point?).

The problem is all the big email providers - Apple Mail, GMail and Outlook haven't added support. Its a bit of a chicken and egg problem - there's no demand for jmap clients because so few servers support it. And there's no pressure on email servers to implement jmap because so few clients support it.

Source: Friends with some of the JMAP authors.

Do you mean that with an IMAP client you can't edit your server side Fastmail filters?

If so, a workaround is to use their web-based email client when you want to edit your filters.

Audacity is OK although buggy.

Like, I work for a FAANG, I have for a long time. But I also do good within and outside that FAANG. I do habitat restoration, I get involved with political organizations that align with my views (mutual aid, socialism, etc.)

One doesn't have to care 100% or 0%, one can live with the understanding that we are in a system where you gotta pay your bills and have problematic favorites, while still trying to make things better where you can.