Using the term "server" is open-ended and it gives ISPs unnecessary discretion over cutting users' connections. If the rationale is that customers whom are operating commercial businesses out of their home internet connection are abusing their internet connection, then put the goal-post there.
Using the term "server" allows ISPs to change the goal-post when its convenient for them, and that's unfair.
Also, a moving goalpost isn't really unfair at all in this situation (Assuming it is, in fact, a moving goalpost). They have every right to make changes to their network to ensure good quality service to everyone.
ETA: If you're going to downvote, you should explain yourself.
e.g. If someone uses the service to download & upload 100gb+ of data a day, and somehow it's actually for personal use, I suspect that Google would restrict them.
If so, the spirit of the terms isn't as much to delineate between types of use as much as it is to delineate between amounts of use.
There is the problem.
Or how about a similar thing for email. Your email remains on a machine in your home, but you can access it from anywhere. Uptime should be pretty much always.
Or how about a commercial scenario? You realize your employer has huge overhead, and that you could undercut their price and offer your skills directly to customers over the Internet. So you start using your home Internet connection to do business. Not running a server, but violating the noncommercial usage policy. Running a business connection would just artificially replace your employer with Google and raise your overhead until it matched the employers, protecting the entrenched centralized business model (which the Internet should be destabilizing and destroying).
Can I run a server from my home?
Our Terms of Service prohibit running a server. However,
use of applications such as multi-player gaming,
video-conferencing, home security and others which may
include server capabilities but are being used for legal
and non-commercial purposes are acceptable and encouraged.
It is nice of them to be explicit with a few hand-picked cases, but that remains grey as fuck as far as I am concerned. What if I run a hairdressing business in my home and happen to blow through several terabytes in a weekend with git-annex? It seems clear to me that this should be acceptable, but I cannot feel confident it would become a problem.Maybe it is clear to some lawyer somewhere, but it is not clear to me, the consumer.
Our Terms of Service prohibit running a server. However,
use of applications such as multi-player gaming,
video-conferencing, home security and others which may
include server capabilities but are being used for legal
and non-commercial purposes are acceptable and
encouraged.
WTF? Our terms of use prohibit using a server, but some server uses, of which we will provide you with some examples but not definitions, are actually (contrary to what our TOS say) both allowed and actually encouraged.So, thanks for telling us that your TOS doesn't actually mean what it says, but no thanks for not actually telling us what it does mean.
This shit is vague. It may be clear to you, but it isn't categorically.
Edit: OK I'm not really in a Google Fiber area, but I do pay for Comcast "business" internet for my house. I currently use about 5x more data than their residential cap allows, for 1.2x the price.