ConductAtlas › Compare › Restricted or Prohibited Content/Industries
Cross-platform comparison

Restricted or Prohibited Content/Industries, Cross-Platform Comparison

238 platforms tracked · 1658 provisions · Compare how platforms differ on this clause type.

238
Platforms
343
Total monitored
Stay ahead of the changes

Track clause changes

Get alerts when any platform updates this clause.

Monitor up to 20 platforms — $4.99/mo → Get the weekly letter, free
Compare platforms side by side
Select 2 to 4 platforms. Comparison shows clause text, consumer impact, and AI-generated difference analysis.
Comparing GitHub vs Cursor · Restricted or Prohibited Content/Industries provisions
← Back to full comparison

Compare restricted or prohibited content/industries governance provisions between GitHub and Cursor. Provisions are extracted from monitored governance documents.

developer_tools GitHub Prohibition on supporting active malware campaigns
What it means
The prohibition requires that the campaign be both unlawful and actively causing technical harms; content that merely relates to such campaigns without directly supporting them may not be covered by this clause.
Consumer impact
You are prohibited from hosting content on GitHub that directly supports unlawful active attack or malware campaigns that are causing technical harms.
Opt-out available
No opt-out available
Actual clause text
directly supports unlawful active attack or malware campaigns that are causing technical harms — such as using our platform to deliver malicious executables or as attack infrastructure...
AI-extracted from source document. Verify against original for legal use.
CA-P-060824
Recent changes
Apr 28, 2026 Medium

GitHub added a new section titled 'AI Features, Training, and Your Data' to its Terms of Service, e…

Cursor
No Restricted or Prohibited Content/Industries clause found in our archive for this platform.
AI Difference Analysis Insight
Stripe's arbitration clause is narrower than Amazon's in one key respect: it includes a small claims court carve-out that Amazon's clause does not. PayPal's clause is the most aggressive of the three, explicitly waiving jury trial rights in addition to class action rights. From a compliance perspective, Amazon presents the lowest risk for B2B contracts while PayPal creates the highest exposure for consumer-facing applications subject to CFPB oversight.
Stay ahead of the changes

Insight only

See what this means with full AI difference analysis.

Monitor up to 20 platforms — $4.99/mo → Get the weekly letter, free
Stay ahead of the changes

Don't miss the next change

Get alerts and full clause analysis when a tracked platform updates this provision. We check daily where we can, and show you where we can't.

Monitor up to 20 platforms — $4.99/mo → Get the weekly letter, free
Stay ahead of the changes

Full clause analysis

Get alerts and full clause analysis for every tracked platform. We check daily where we can, and show you where we can't.

Monitor up to 20 platforms — $4.99/mo → Get the weekly letter, free
Browse by provision type
Account Control Content Moderation Acceptable Use Restrictions Payment & Fees Refunds & Chargebacks Data Collection Data Usage Data Sharing Data Retention Privacy Rights Arbitration Legal Jurisdiction Liability Limitation Indemnification Platform Discretion Policy Changes Enforcement Actions Monetization Rules Developer / API Restrictions AI / Automated Decision-Making Restricted or Prohibited Content/Industries Disclosure and Transparency Requirements Targeting and Audience Restrictions Commission, Payout, and Attribution Terms Landing Page and Destination Requirements Intellectual Property General Contract Terms Export Controls & Sanctions Other