Facebook is becoming less and less appealing, are you others feeling the same way? More taking and less fun and giving.
Other than party pics (which I wouldn't use Twitter for), I'm finding less and less reasons for visiting.
Pictures
· 9 months ago
Thanks for pointing it out. In most civilized countries such claims are effectively invalid. Btw., even by granting a "worldwide license to use" i.e. a photo, ownership is not transferred.
Matthew Loop
· 9 months ago
Damn!! The Facebook reich is running on all cylinders now. Sure makes it easier for "big brother" if all of our info is the same place. Thanks for making your users bend-over guys.
Rolf Luehrs
· 9 months ago
Is there already a fb group up fighting against the new TOS?
Len Kendall
· 9 months ago
I'm not going to condone this by any means. The pictures, thoughts, and links I share are not intended to be used as a means of profit for a company. BUT that being said I'm not going to be surprised or outraged by this either. For years we've lived off the idea that content on the net should be free. If record companies or movie studios release content digitally, millions of us have gone by the principal that we can take that content for ourselves and not pay for it. Their content is arguably much more valuable than ours yet now we seem to be uncomfortable with this idea when it comes back in our direction.
It's understandable that the content we create is more personal and private. But we need to remind ourselves that the state of internet is what we made it. We created an infrastructure of sharing and open source information.
If you want to protest, then I would suggest you take two actions:
1. Cancel your Facebook (or other social networking account). Most of the content we as private citizens create has little value other than its privacy to us.
2. Stop caring. Assume that the creative capital you put on the web is no longer yours. With this in mind, actively decide what you want to remain on your hard drive and what you have no need to solely control.
Richard Hall
· 9 months ago
You quote OrtensiaCadmium on Consumerist: “That’s fairly common language in terms for various sites".
So why are we more vexed by Facebook doing this than, say, Google?
olvado
· 9 months ago
This hardly surprises me as social networking sites seek to monetize their service - advertising is obviously not enough for them.
I am curious of the legality of this, offering no warning, therefore no chance to remove yourself/your stuff prior to these changes to the TOS
Shevonne
· 9 months ago
I think you might be right that it might be due to Facebook Connect, but instead of acting like we are joining the Borg, they should just have some disclaimer when you publish something to Facebook using the tool.
bradleyf81
· 8 months ago
This comment is priceless... "instead of acting like we are joining the Borg,"
Jamie Harrington
· 9 months ago
Something that is interesting about the photo tagging thing...
My husband did not have a facebook account, therefore had never accepted the terms of service from them... So, one day I was browsing and had found where someone had tagged him in a photo (He has a fairly unusual name, so he is easily searched for.) Well, he didn't want to be tagged in that particular photo, so he wrote facebook a letter, and they told him that they only way to remove his tag from the photo was to join facebook, and that he was required to accept their terms of service in order to join. They said there was no way on their end for them to remove the tag from the photo without him joining up. So, now he has a facebook account, and has accepted their TOS. Hello, Catch 22 :(
bradleyf81
· 8 months ago
That sounds really shady. In fact, that sort of thing wouldn't go over well with a "RL" company. It's as if they tricked him into accepting their TOS, so they wouldn't have to remove the photo.
Linda Jordan
· 9 months ago
This is disturbing, although I can understand some of the legal thinking behind this action. My Facebook site will be coming down today and I will be forwarding this article to all my friends who are using Facebook.
Agile Cyborg
· 9 months ago
Devil's advocate:
How is this any different than the klepto mindset of the average web user who assumes ownership of anything they can scrounge up on p2p?
I am sure Facebook views the public availability of digital material no different than most of the people using Facebook: free for the taking.
............................ Fact is, this is clearly a blatant infringement on creative output and the arts should flee Facebook.
Justin
· 9 months ago
This is the most ridiculous violation of privacy I have ever read. C'mon Facebook, really?
There needs to be regulations set on how sites can use content from users.
Karl Bunday
· 9 months ago
There should be legal recourse for this under various consumer protection statutes. For sure, it's hard to imagine a court enforcing this kind of "contract" for Facebook as against a member.
Angel b
· 9 months ago
Does this mean that every link on the RSS feed that you put on your profile, particularly of your blog or website, say via FriendFeed is now Facebook's? Photos and notes I can understand. How does this kind of link work under this TOS?
bradleyf81
· 8 months ago
This is exactly what I was wondering about. It's somewhat acceptable to me that if I publish content directly on Facebook, or upload photos directly to Facebook, that they have some sort of shared control over it. That they completely and totally own it with no way for me to retrieve it is a little rough though. But, what worried me the most is the question of whether or not they think they own my blog entries too.
Matthew
· 9 months ago
My personal content may not ever be used in a way that I wouldn't condone. But that misses the point all together. Who would openly and knowingly agree to those TOS? Facebook is stupid. And yet they have gone ahead and unethically (MEMBERS WERE NOT NOTIFIED OF THIS VERY SERIOUS CHANGE) "fixed" their TOS to give tyrannical control of your personal data. What scare's me is the fact that this isn't some "off-the-beaten-path" social network here... It's arguably (since FaceBook Connect) the single most influential social network in the world.
This must be stopped by users making as much fuss as possible.
This isn't just about Facebook - it's about the direction of the internet.
IF YOU ARE READING THIS - make a choice to do SOMETHING about it. I am calling for a facebook boycott from within facebook... and ditching my account for all purposes EXCEPT to inform others about this mess.
Justin
· 9 months ago
EVIL COMPANY OT SAY THE LEAST.
Look, they are running out of cash, and clearly have no viable business model to deal with their growth..this is basically their last gasp at monetization, by owning millions of photos, streams, videos, content etc. Now you will see them selling all this stuff to spam lists, marketing companies, governments, etc... You better believe it, no stopping them now.
I am so happy I canceled my facebook account months ago, I knew they would do something like this.
I mean what more do you expect from a company that stole and cheated from its inception.
Porta
· 9 months ago
And NOW someone notices this? after years of saying that facebook is the next good thing? who's next? twitter? someone will notice that twitter can use their users tweet to something else? Come on, people... we are all grown up here...
deepikaur
· 9 months ago
Seriously, Facebook? All users should receive some sort of email or notice, or something when they make a change to the TOS. And this isn't something I would have accepted to when I had first opened my account.
My question coincides with olvado's. How legal is this, making such a change without prior warning, giving people a chance to remove anything they'd like?
jazzjeppe
· 9 months ago
To be honest, I have never read a whole TOS in my entire life. I just use my brain (i would like to think) and share what I want to share with others. This won't affect my usage of Facebook, I just can't be bothered.
Graeme Wood
· 9 months ago
Not going to go into my views on FB and their ethics, as they are shared by many commenters above. Thing is, I'm not sure how different this is to major record companies, who have been pointing out for years that it is THEIR data being stolen - not just at a scale that makes a bit of money on the side, but that undermines their whole business model.
My point isn’t that this is a good or bad thing, rather that those of us who are most vocal about data privacy also tend to be pretty vocal about how all data is free, and copyright and DRM are outdated concepts. It’s not like someone from Napster called up EMI and said ‘This is a ten year warning, act now or your business won’t exist any more.’ What’s that? Oh.
Jonathan Seely
· 9 months ago
Very interesting... this really concerns me as I feed my blog through Facebook. Does this mean all of my blog posts are their intellectual property?
Jessica Doyle
· 9 months ago
This is very disturbing.
I feel a little sick to my stomach now thinking of all my art that is on there.
Mr.Blue
· 9 months ago
They gone too far, this time. It seems that those guys are crazy because of money and dont even think about the uesres' feelings ?
Maybe Facebook should change its name to Fascistbook to match their TOS !
Not important
· 9 months ago
LISTEN:
EVERY SINGLE WEBSITE that you upload content to OWNS your data. This is not ANYTHING new.
GET OVER IT.
Roxanne
· 9 months ago
The legal implications here seem tenuous. I'm not a lawyer (thank goodness) but it seems to me that whenever there is copyrighted materials, some platform cannot just come and say "oh sorry by the way, now WE have all the rights to that material". Something is a bit amiss with the wording here.
Roxanne
· 9 months ago
The legal implications here seem huge. I'm not a lawyer (thank goodness) but it seems to me that whenever there is copyrighted materials, some platform cannot just come and say "oh sorry by the way, now WE have all the rights to that material". Something is a bit amiss with the wording here.
Staple Crops
· 9 months ago
The policy was pretty bad even before this change. Interesting how they got rid of the last bit of loophole. Why are you still on FB anyway? Face to Face convos are the new new sh*t. http://www.democracynow.org/2009/2/12/harry_lew...
Brandon
· 9 months ago
I'm ranting to friends about this change today. I don't think the average end user will care, but I want to know WHY they did this.
1. If it's to ensure they don't get sued for other facebook connect sites caching your data, why don't they just put *that* into the FB connect TOS - saying, "we can't be held responsible for others caching your data"
2. Myspace has strict rules in their developer SDK about other sites caching users personal data, why can't FB?
3. Why do they need to use our data in advertising at all? Someone uploads a cool picture, just contact the author about using it, would probably take an hour tops.
4. How can they respect privacy settings (I set my photo to private, therefore FB can't advertise with it) but not respect privacy when I delete my account (the equivalent of setting ALL my content to private).
5. Speaking of Privacy settings they WILL respect, that seems to violate the idea that they are protecting themselves from another FB connect site caching your content. I could set a pic to private and then the other site would have to delete it? Great, why not when I delete my account?
Lynne
· 9 months ago
It seems like they are really just trying to protect themselves from lawsuits, right? I can't believe Facebook would be interested in "owning" this content. Just my $.02
RickJ
· 9 months ago
I also can't get over this. I have emailed FB which I would think be the best course of action for us all. How can we agreed to TOS that we have never seen as they've been snuck in!?!?! Surely they should have an opt in or leave Facebook option.
Just to counteract those above who are saying" it's our fault cos we pinched MP3s", I hardly think that is fair as not everyone has done that and I bet there are a ton of users who only know how to use FB not torrents or whatever. Tarring everyone with the same brush isn't a valid argument this time me hearties. And what on earth has MP3s got to do with personal data, a more valid argument would be us stealing data from companies like how much the bonus was for this person and what salary this person was on and what their profits are on this model etc....but this is data stealing not product theft we are talking about....am I right or did I just go off on one for no reason?
SolShine7
· 9 months ago
That's quite disturbing.
Avril Mackay
· 9 months ago
As above comments seem to have covered most of my concerns .. and as we are all aware yes the internet has opened up a sunami ..of possibilities with regard to F/fbk ... but the main question I want to know is the LEGALITY ...of all of this ..as I and friends have posted artwork ..and now this could be used by them for their own profit ..etc ...!!Seems very dodgy to me that they can get away with this ...Ive posted link to this on my profile ...but as someone said the only way to hit them is to come off ...!!Happy Days ....x
Lifecruiser
· 9 months ago
We're all aware of that if you put something in the internet, it's a risk, but that doesn't mean that it's the right thing or even legal to just take it.
The Wild West is spreading everywhere. Soon it will be OK to grab anything that comes i your way - is not locked up or someone else is chained on to?
If I don't lock my car on the street, is it OK to steal it?
It will never be OK in my world....
I really don't like when serious (?) companies lower themselves like this.
Agile Cyborg
· 9 months ago
RickJ , Not everyone has pinched mp3's, to be sure. In reference to your claim: the end product is still digital. It doesn't f'ing matter whether it is personal or creative. It is still appropriated without express and specific permission.
I am somewhat agog at the overwhelming response here against an entity pilfering digital property when this is, in fact, a common internet behavior (whether the entity is a large corporation or your college buddy).
'Course, if all you responsive folk are creative producers then, of course, the overwhelming backlash makes perfect sense because you have the most to lose.
I add my voice to the chorus.
xmccaw
· 9 months ago
What I don't like is that you can't EVER delete your profile. You can only "hibernate" it. But if you have access to the e-mail account associated with your account, you (or ANYONE with access to it!) can reinstate your profile. It's like a never-ending corn maze!!!!
Jacob "Jake" Guay
· 9 months ago
Hell, I got nothing to hide. I'll never be famous (...unless it's porn-related lol). Anyone can add me. I don't care. :-)
Comments comparing this TOS change to people downloading content (DRM music, movies, etc.) need to consider this one MAJOR difference.
We are not using FB to SELL our private data - if we were, that would change this picture.
From comment above: "For years we’ve lived off the idea that content on the net should be free. If record companies or movie studios release content digitally, millions of us have gone by the principal that we can take that content for ourselves and not pay for it. Their content is arguably much more valuable than ours yet now we seem to be uncomfortable with this idea when it comes back in our direction."
This misses the point entirely. If we were SELLING something and then FB said they had full rights to our work, then you could make a similar comparison.
gottabkd
· 9 months ago
Geeesh.... what next? What happens to my account when I die? It becomes a time capsules of my life on FB??
I stopped putting photos up on FB ages ago and suggest that anyone who cares about their pictures watermark them, right across the middle of the photo... this way you get credit for it should they be used elsewhere.
I would also suggest you re-check your privacy settings... they may have mysteriously & suddenly changed since the new TOS.
Email opt out: "Opt out of receiving emails from Facebook.
Note: Even after you deactivate, your friends can still invite you to events, tag you in photos, or ask you to join groups. If you opt out, you will NOT receive these email invitations and notifications from your friends."
Look, people. There's NO escape. Like the PP said... it becomes a FB time capsule. There's really no clear way to delete it. The best you can do is delete ALL personal info (including pix), all friends, and change your name to "John Smith" and put your "network" (location) as NYC and just abandon it.
Graeme Wood
· 9 months ago
Looks like lots of people haven't read the ToS - Facebook have ALWAYS owned everything you uploaded - certainly since I joined it back in early 07. All that's changed is that they will now still own your content if you leave the service.
Agile Cyborg
· 9 months ago
Matthew,
SELLING has nothing to do with anything. If I post a sketch that I have NO plan to sell, neither you or Facebook have the right to acquire the image for your personal or commercial use without specific permission to do so.
WordVixen
· 9 months ago
I still remember Yahoo doing the same thing in the 90's- claiming all rights to all content whether on their hosted websites or things posted to the Yahoo Groups (including emails, I believe). There was such an uproar that they had to rescind almost immediately.
Right now, I'm just very happy that I don't use Facebook.
parkcityxj
· 9 months ago
Has anybody seen this vid that shows that facebook has supposed links to the CIA? It's a b.s propaganda vid, but worth the watch. http://albumoftheday.com/facebook
You people really should learn how the web works. Granted, FB changing the terms of service and not notifying people is by no means acceptable, but other than that you have no one to blame but yourselves. I have a facebook, and i am not worried at all. Why? Because i know that the second i upload a picture to facebook's server it is their property. Facebook isn't your own personal webserver. It's like handing someone $5 and then complaining because they won't give it back. You can't have it both ways. Not to mention that ANYONE, can save your picture and do whatever they please with it, and you would never be the wiser. All it takes is a save picture as... and you're selling adult toys on a Hong Kong website, and unless you check EVERY SINGLE website on the internet you'd never know. If you didn't want your face on the internet, you shouldn't have posted it (or tell your friends not to post it).
Murph
· 9 months ago
Facebook claiming perpetual license to use is like a mobile company claiming rights to use the text messages you sent over their network. Facebook should be a conduit for content, not the user of the content.
Guy Stevens
· 9 months ago
Has anyone actually read through the TOS to FIND this? Cause I'm finding Facebook is still saying the opposite.
Alana
· 9 months ago
Wow this is really messed up. It would be one thing if our world was less conservative, meaning, you couldn't get fired from a job for a having what some priss might consider a racy photo, but our world is just not that open-minded yet. This could pose a lot of problems for a lot of people. Especially all the kids who say, "Well I'm just a college student, it doesn't matter. When I'm looking for a job, I won't have this stuff on my site," but you know what, people will still be able to find it!
V
· 9 months ago
Except for User Content and Applications/Connect Sites, all materials, content and trademarks on the Facebook Service are the property of Facebook and/or its licensors and are protected by all relevant IP laws and other proprietary rights (including copyright, trademark, trade dress and patent laws) and any other applicable laws
USER CONTENT is NOOOOOOT facebook propert. Who the heck wrote this crap???
david
· 9 months ago
HAHAHA! i'm sorry that's just hilarious. Ya'll should all take a page from Guy Stevens and read. Facebook has not added a single phrase that matches what this article says. How many of you actually canceled your account!? BTW what were you hoping to accomplish with that? Just Wondering. You canceled your account because facebook can keep your stuff after you cancel your account? That makes alot of sense. Mashable.com, one place i won't be coming for newss again.
Dan Monceaux
· 9 months ago
So... when will facebook start selling people images to newspapers and other media?
Or has that started already..? As a creative person, this gives me the willies.
david
· 9 months ago
"Except for User Content and Applications/Connect Sites, all materials, content and trademarks on the Facebook Service are the property of Facebook"
maybe ya'll should actually read the TOS.
The clause that this article mentions, just states that when you upload something to facebook, they can post it...
And the second clause just states that if you cancel your account, you're still subjected to their TOS
other than that... ya'll are idiots. Facebook isn't going to sell your damn pictures. Did ya'll really think they were?
Danford Denga
· 9 months ago
What happens to the privacy policy face book tells us is in place?The fact that they have that they have it they should respect it.
Court
· 9 months ago
I can understand the archiving bit. Let's say one wants to remove their facebook profile and delete everything. They could sue Facebook and force the IT department to spend weeks sifting through 3 years of Server Backup Tapes to find all that content and remove it. That would put the company out of business. Totally understandable.
Agile Cyborg
· 9 months ago
I will remove words to simplify the License section of Facebook's tos so david's earthworm brain might actually comprehend what is stated:
Quote:
You hereby grant Facebook a perpetual, fully paid, worldwide license to copy and create derivative works and distribute any User Content you post on the Facebook Service.
Mistifear
· 9 months ago
This is utterly disturbing. I realize that nothing is truly safe on the internet, but this is just ridiculous. There is a reason that Facebook, supposedly, gives us the right to control what other uses can see. Apparently, however, our full name, face, and other information could appear in a completely different city from where you live. That just completely defeats the purpose of all of the privacy settings that we can modify.
Rich
· 9 months ago
Well it would seem to me that this is public domain, facebook can and will exercise the priveldge to use these photos/videos as they see fit. Now I do believe they could have allowed their users to know of this change before hand, and should to keep "transparency". But in the long run it won't matter because 90% of people on facebook don't know or don't care.
Joshua
· 9 months ago
"Someone can still take your photo, slap it on Facebook, and now neither you nor the author of the photo can stop Facebook from using the photo in whichever way they please."
That is not exactly true. In my home state of Virginia, it is against the law for anyone to use a recognizable picture of me (a private person) in a commercial manner without my written consent.
So if someone posts a picture of me and Facebooks decides to use it for something, they will have to defend that use in the Virginia Courts.
Agile Cyborg
· 9 months ago
Rich, Public domain is not applicable (in most cases) when one is referring to modern creative work.
Public domain covers work not copyrighted at all or the copyright has expired.
Snowman
· 9 months ago
When I started my FB account, my reasoning was that it was out there for anyone to see. If you are going to post something to facebook you should use discretion. If I don't care about it I will post it. If I do then I will think about what the possible consequence would be. Use your head and don't post things that you don't want someone else to have access to or control over.
KRIS
· 9 months ago
I guess you guys don't know how to read.
Ownership; Proprietary Rights
Except for User Content and Applications/Connect Sites, all materials, content and trademarks on the Facebook Service are the property of Facebook and/or its licensors and are protected by all relevant IP laws and other proprietary rights (including copyright, trademark, trade dress and patent laws) and any other applicable laws. Without limiting the foregoing, FACEBOOK, the F LOGO, FB, FACE, POKE, THE WALL and 32665 and all related logos, are trademarks of Facebook. Except as expressly authorized by Facebook in writing, you agree not to use, sell, license, distribute, copy, publish, stream, publicly perform or display, transmit, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works or otherwise make unauthorized use of the materials, content or trademarks.
Peter Braun
· 9 months ago
This is the largest theft of Intellectual Property in corporate history... all with a sneaky little change in an online Terms of Service agreement that no-one ever reads. Thank goodness for the bloggers!!
There should be a law against this!!! Its like the credit card companies changing the terms of service on their credit cards and all of a sudden jacking up your rates or changing the way they calculate interest on outstanding balances. Its outright theft!
Danielle
· 9 months ago
What if you agreed with it on the old terms, not the new one?
ILSole
· 9 months ago
It shouldn't other anyone im sure you can read the TOS'S and pick it apart an not like alot of things.. im sure they also reserve the right to ban and delete anyone they want at anytime FOR ANY REASON THEY FEEL FIT.. so before you go and get all pissy about this and you dont want them using your stuff.. DELETE first, close your account later.
the uni i go to recently changed requirements for some of the majors offered - the rule is that you were to fulfill the requirements that were in place when you started as a first year. could it be the same thing on facebook? that if you signed up with original TOS, you are still under those TOS, but if you join under these new ones they apply to you?
John doe
· 9 months ago
class action lawsuit. enough said.
xelavee
· 9 months ago
This is concerning... I've posted some areas you can use to protect your information on FB on my blog: "Important Application settings to keep your information safe on FB" Sure it doesn't solve the problem of the delete account issue but worth looking into.
Sam
· 9 months ago
this is stupid, just dont put stupid pictures up on the internet, or take stupid pictures in general.
James P
· 9 months ago
This is going to make people start to read the TOS, whether it's on a social network, professional network or any other website that allows you to post information.
Jonathan Seely
· 9 months ago
If nothing else, I am hoping this will renew interest in TOS agreements, after bringing to light the fact that the Facebook TOS is closer to the norm than the exception. You can read my reflections here if you're interested: http://tinyurl.com/brfex9
miami
· 9 months ago
what about if you post a picture that someone else took and owns the copyright to, like a famous picture?
mark
· 9 months ago
Does anyone know who actually owns and controls Facebook?
mark
· 9 months ago
Do you know who actually owns and controls Facebook?
mark
· 9 months ago
Mark Zuckerberg, creator of Facebook, doesn't have his own Facebook page. I went through more than 50 "fan" and "join group" pages before it started again and he doesn't have his own page. I wonder why?
Agile Cyborg
· 9 months ago
mark, I believe the vile shadow government controls Facebook.
Seriously, it is vile.
.....
· 9 months ago
Facebook almost ruined my life
AD
· 9 months ago
What happens if you deactivated your account before the new TOS came out? I deactivated my account a year ago and saw the controversy over the updated TOS on the news. Is it retroactive?
k scott
· 9 months ago
umm... i just looked and I didn't see any terms of service.. theres a terms of use and a privacy policy, neither of which contain those paragraphs... unless I missed em.. oh well
diogenes23
· 9 months ago
but none of us has resigned the agreement. so how valid is it. One cannot sign a contract and have one party change the argreement without another agreement
d-me
· 9 months ago
hello to all of you people out there posting about how disturbed you are about facebook. Do you realize that by posting your response on this website you are doing the exact same thing? This comment is now public domain and there is nothing I or you or anyone can do about it. welcome to the 21st century. keep sharing this link on facebook. that'll do the trick!!! I'm sure the IP address that this was sent from wa saved as well so anyone with decent access can even find out where I am sending this from
nicole
· 9 months ago
i think this is a laod of crap... no where did i agree to allow them to use my things for their own personal gain.... i at one time added part of my copy righted book on this site.... i'd like to know how legally they are allowed to use this without my permission ... i am sure there has to be a legal right somewhere here.... i will be contacting mylawyer about this ... this is outrageous by all means .... and i will be delteing not only my fb but all its content as well... i am sure i wont be the only on this band wagon .........
Zac
· 9 months ago
I only read the first 30 posts so im not sure if this has been mentioned yet. But the BIG difference between us taking stuff off of the internet and this, is that we take it and use it THEY take it, and can (legally) do whatever they want to it sell it distribute it or w/e
Jason Salsbury
· 9 months ago
"Someone can still take your photo, slap it on Facebook, and now neither you nor the author of the photo can stop Facebook from using the photo in whichever way they please." Untrue - Facebook cannot be licensed to use materials by someone who is not the actual copyright holder. You would need to sue the person who illegall uploaded your copyrighted work, but their illegal act combined with Facebook's TOS wouldn't contravene your copyright.
Tinfoil Hat
· 9 months ago
Come on. The reason for these "perpetual licensing agreements" should be obvious to anyone capable of lateral thought.
And to be clear, the license is in regards to the "promotion of the Facebook Platform". Yes, they can use your image in an ad, for example. If you delete your photo, they can still use it. If you don't own the rights to an image they use, you are in breach of their TOS because you uploaded the image.
This is just common sense.
They aren't going to run amok creating some kind of Getty Images "photos of people on Facebook for sale" service. Use your brain. Articles like this are boring, fear-mongering crap aimed at the very lowest common denominator.
Tinfoil Hat
· 9 months ago
A quick addendum:
"Mark Zuckerberg, creator of Facebook, doesn’t have his own Facebook page. I went through more than 50 “fan†and “join group†pages before it started again and he doesn’t have his own page. I wonder why?"
An example of someone who doesn't know how the Facebook privacy settings work. And moreover, the guy doesn't have a public profile specifically so he won't need to field thousands of messages from idiots on the internet. The license agreement complies with your privacy settings.
And please, fix your commenting system. It's crap. For a site that prides itself on "Web 2.0" coverage, you should at least be able to set up your form textboxes correctly.
Emiloly
· 9 months ago
After reading that through it seems to me that Facebook has kinda contradicted itself. What's the point of having a 'private' account (hidden in searches etc blah blah blah) if they can just pimp all your content? Seems like THEY are breeching privacy issues by creating this term of service.
NOTE: I would have a read through the terms of service before you upload anything you wouldn't want facebook to take ownership of.
Having someone else post one of your pictures on Facebook will not grant Facebook any rights to your material, if my memory serves. You can not grant rights that you do not own, so unless the person posting the images owns the rights the Facebook ToS are claiming, they are not granted.
As for why they are doing it, Facebook Connect is one good reason. Another is that this kind of clause is practically required for them to be able to create thumbnails, rotate images for you, tag images, or do anything else that modifies your pictures. Google has had legal problems multiple times with their image search that displays thumbnails; the owners of the linked websites sued Google, claiming copyright infringement for creation of a derivative work. This type of clause in ToS protects the company from that. It also would allow them to do other things, but I seriously doubt they would take advantage of it; the PR implications would be horrid.
hopdevil99
· 9 months ago
Good article in the Guardian, what did you expect with CIA a shareholder????
I may quit too! I hate others keeping my stuff without my permission!
CBRA
· 9 months ago
If you are putting up things you don't want shared around the internet then simply don't post it. Why is this a surprise? If you think you're safe because it's a popular site you are just naive. I enjoy facebook to catch up with friends. Keep your information limited and I'd suggest never post pictures of your kids or friends kids.
CBRA
· 9 months ago
CBRA,
Don't simplify a complicated state of affairs just to serve your inability to rationalize information.
The internet is much more just a simple family hangout. It is also vast marketplace and gallery for a myriad of creative content.
There are legal expectations attached to the ownership of creative work that ha been submitted to the web that must be diligently maintained and overseen.
When one of the web's largest social network providers decides to 'adjust' a TOS statement directly impacting the licensing of User Content (which includes innumerable creative expressions contained within the network) it has simply stepped into the light of investigation and oversight which is exactly what this article and thread is about.
To simplify this into a family/friend affair, as many have done, illustrates the void of knowledge out there on this matter.
Breanne
· 9 months ago
Um. Who the heck cares? Honestly, what did you all expect when you POST THINGS ON THE INTERNET? The internet isn't private, all of it is owned by millions of people and corporations. And it's all public. If you don't want people seeing what you put on the internet, don't put stuff on the internet. Haven't we all learned this from Paris Hilton?
Maria Sanchez
· 9 months ago
..........I didn't know this...........
Howard W Penrose PhD CMRP
· 9 months ago
I have a strange feeling that if they chose to use your photo or content without permission that a suit concerning copyright would be an interesting challenge. Presently, the National Writers Union is challenging similar usage violations against New York Times.
However, the key is still not to post anything you don't want everyone to have access to. Such has been the lessons with MySpace.
Howard
Eleazar
· 9 months ago
The problem really isn't the TOS, when something has been posted on the internet you should know that it is now public domain. The problem comes from the sudden change in TOS with no prior warning. As someone who has had the dream to go into the creative and entertainment business I know better than to put any of my material up that I may use later, it is just common sense. The problem more lies in the principle. I didn't agree to those terms when I signed-up, and everything on my facebook was posted before the new TOS. So either we deserve a chance to take down what we don't want to possibly be used by facebook, or the new TOS does not apply to anything posted before prior to the new TOS.
Mary
· 9 months ago
It's about time Facebook started getting exposed... long overdue if you ask me. MashMas
If you don't want FB to share you photos and such don't post information that you don't want shared! Pretty simple.
Servers are servers and they have to keep backups in case they go down. If they went dowm and then came back up and your information was gone, would you like it? Probably not.
Fucking Facebook, I hate you. All my base are belong to you, now?
Brandon
· 9 months ago
How can people say either not to post anything you don't want in the public domain, or that you shouldn't share material on Facebook!?
1. Sharing IS the point of facebook. Without that user case, it has little value. 2. Other sites seem to have no problem with more fair terms of service. Flickr.com doesn't suddenly get the rights to all your work. In fact, it allows you, the user to set your own licensing terms for each content item. Why? Because it wants intelligent and real photographers using their system, and not just myspace teens.
FB could easily do the same, and simply allow the content to continue to belong to the poster.
Floating
· 9 months ago
I agree -- Facebook's appeal just took a serious dive. if the legals can't figure out a way to respect our privacy while protecting their butts, then they shouldn't have ventured into social networking. I'm incensed and what a wasteful shame.
Bob
· 9 months ago
I'm a little lost about the uproar. Facebook owns the server. I'm agreeing to use their server to set up my own private social network to share thoughts, and photos from time to time. FB is the middleman that provides the connections, and it’s free. Free.
I’m currently not inclined to set up my own server and write the code for my own social networking community (yet).
I haven’t been getting any unwanted solicitations from FB since I started using it. I haven’t seen an increase in SPAM, and I haven’t seen a intrusion on my privacy that I haven’t already condoned before deciding to use FB. As I understand, FB’s intentions are genuine and not out to harm people.
Moreover, I’m curious, how many of us (including myself) have posted on FB pictures of friends before asking for their permission? Wouldn’t that be a violation of their privacy as well?
Social networking via the internet involves trust on a medium that is free and open to the public at large, and I know that I have control as well as responsibility over what I post.
Vickie
· 9 months ago
I just finished reading the article entited "All Your Stuff is Ours, Even if You Quit\" dated February 16, 2009 - 8:24 am PDT - by Stan Schroeder. Very enlightening. Have you done similar evaluations of privacy concerns with other websites, such as Tumblr? I've read the Tumblr policy, but I don't know exactly what verbiage to look for to determine whether I am giving up rights to my photos, etc.
Ginger
· 9 months ago
Most sites do this. Most are just not so open in saying so. It stands to reason that if you put ocntent out ther for all users to see then some of them willd ownload your pics etc and you just never know about it. Anyone with any sense wouldn't put anything of value ont he net anyway. Besides this all server owners are required by the laws of most countries to keep your information indefinitely against the trheat of criminal activity or for use in tracing people's activities and whereabouts. Get used to it. This is how the world is these days.
DH
· 9 months ago
Except for User Content and Applications/Connect Sites,>/bold> all materials, content and trademarks on the Facebook Service are the property of Facebook and/or its licensors and are protected by all relevant IP laws and other proprietary rights (including copyright, trademark, trade dress and patent laws) and any other applicable laws.
DH
· 9 months ago
Oops - forgot to add the comment.. The terms and conditions are to protect Facebook from pathetic lawsuits. They don't at anytime claim ownership of your materials, merely a license to use it. If all Lawyers were chopped up & fed to fish this type of ToS wouldn't be required to cover their arses.
Keith Wolfe
· 9 months ago
This just made me ill. I use jabbster now :)
RowanF
· 9 months ago
Wow. I am so glad I quit over beacons. I joined Facebook in 2006 because the American Library Association chose to organize Banned Books Week there. I stuck around for a couple of months and found it an annoying "service" mostly consisting of strangers trying to "poke" me by turning me into a vampire or something.
Then in December 2006 they started broadcasting the things you bought online to all your friends. No, I didn't have any holiday surprises ruined... but the idea that they did all that without asking for an opt-in offended me. And so I decided to delete my Facebook account. I delinked my blog from it, took down everything I could. And then went to delete it. That is when I found out you can't delete a Facebook account. You can only "deactivate" it. I got this email: *** Your Facebook account has been deactivated.
To reactivate your account, simply log in as you normally would, and we'll send you a reactivation email.
Come back soon, The Facebook Team ***
So they still have *some* amount of my info in their servers. And now they claim to own it. Grrrr.
bias
· 9 months ago
While it's easy to understand the motivations for this, this is a HUGE detriment to professional photographers and artists who make a living off selling their work and licenses. Some of them use facebook as an outlet for connecting with friends and getting feedback. I'm glad that I've only ever published my "real" work to my professional website, which is protected by my own terms, but even valued travel pics I will not be posting on there any more.
Ruth Filer
· 9 months ago
You ought to reconsider. This is Big Brother in a big way. It is like ripples in a pond. What we thought was a neat way to share and have fun is becoming scary.
Igor
· 9 months ago
It's garbage now, especially with the new layout, i don't even wanna go on it anymore.
Tami
· 9 months ago
Interestingly, I posted a link to this page on my FB account, and when I logged in later this afternoon, I saw this bulletin:
A couple of weeks ago, we posted an update to our Terms of Use that we hoped would clarify some parts of it for our users. Over the past couple of days, we have received a lot of questions and comments about these updated terms and what they mean for people and their information. Because of the feedback we received, we have decided to return to our previous Terms of Use while we resolve the issues that people have raised.
Emiloly
· 9 months ago
Just logged in to FB and got this message at the top of the page!!
Terms of Use Update Close
Over the past few days, we have received a lot of feedback about the new terms we posted two weeks ago. Because of this response, we have decided to return to our previous Terms of Use while we resolve the issues that people have raised.
If you want to share your thoughts on our new terms, check out our group Facebook Bill of Rights and Responsibilities.
Power to the people!
notofacebook
· 9 months ago
FascistBook has shown it's true colours. I never signed up and am glad to. As a security pro I know that companies look at your facebook when recruiting, the police can find out more about you there than in any of their leads. All Your Bases Are Belong To Us
firmania
· 9 months ago
i think they already made a statement about this, i found it just now, when i'm logging in
leils
· 9 months ago
Serious!
Reality
· 9 months ago
I believe that this hoopla is nothing more than Facebook's lawyers making a tiny mistake. But like most thinks in the on-line community, people become shrill about things of which they have no real understanding. Face it folks, the Internet is considered a public domain. If you post anything to the net, anyone in the world can get it and use it as they please. I personally have never understood the appeal of a social networking site to an adult. I certainly cannot understand why any thinking adult would upload personal content or content that may be worth money. It's like taping money to a lamp post and trusting that no one will take it.
JESUSFUCKINGCHRIST
· 9 months ago
this government is OUT OF FUCKING CONTROL.
teddy
· 9 months ago
well for anyone thats had the net awhile do a google search on ur name it will pop up all things on net are public no longer private, if u wat something kept private dont put it on the net simple as that
Daryn
· 9 months ago
To all those people who say "well, the record companies have stuff stolen from them, so it's okay for FB to steal from us." Uh, you folks do realize that the record companies employ thousands of lawyers to crush people who steal their content? They don't simply "let" people steal their stuff. and, regardless that people do it, it is still stealing. Shall we legalize murder just because people do it anyway? At best, you acknowledge and confirm that FB is stealing from us, but you want to let them do it. Hey, if you want to bend over, that's fine. I hope we get to see your face used in an Erectile Dysfunction or STD advertisement or maybe in a recruiting video for the KKK or the Nazis. For me, the web is too large to bother with a backstabbing thief and the next big thing is already on its way. Goodbye Facebook.
Jessica
· 9 months ago
I think there are two different camps here, the private people who use Facebook for fun, family and community - and the professional people such as artists who use Facebook to showcase their work and make networking connections. Private people don't usually care about who claims ownership of their stuff when they upload it, they don't loose anything and their perfectly happy to share whatever they upload. And that's fine.
Professional's have DEEP concern about copyright issues, most pro artists DON'T behave the way other's do, we don't download music & movies illegally and we don't assume everything on the internet is free. We have an understanding of copyright laws and what it actually means to spend hours, days and months to create something original and have it stolen from you by people who don't give you any credit and in a way that doesn't benefit you financially. The mind-set that "everything on the internet is free use, and if you don't like it, don't upload shit and don't complain if someone steals your stuff" is completely retarded; although I can understand it (it's very easy to assume something doesn't matter if it doesn't affect you). However if you just take a moment and actually imagine what the internet would be like if artists of all kinds decided to take on that advice, and didn't upload anything they weren't willing to give away for free… what would the internet actually be like?
Would you be able to enjoy looking at amazing artwork on websites like DeviantArt, or ConceptArts, or CGSociety, would you be able to learn for free directly from the masters you admire through the work they share on sites like that? Would you be able to hop through MySpace profiles listening to music from fringe, indie and alternative bands, finding new favorites? Would you be able to enjoy all kinds of content on YouTube, put there by pro’s who want to reach new audiences?
No, you’d have to buy the books, DVD’s, CD’s or simply never, ever be exposed to it.
I’m old enough o remember what it was like before the internet, and to look at something that interested me I’d have to watch TV, go to the library or buy magazines… and even then I had an extremely limited selection. Now, I have an unlimited mind-boggling access to the entire world, I learn something new everyday, I see something amazing everyday.
The internet is an incredible tool for learning and discovering new things, seeing amazing things you’d never otherwise see. But if you treat it with disrespect as if it’s some right that you can shit all over and the people who provide all of that amazing content should just suck it up and be grateful to you…. It will eventually go away. Artists are already pulling their work from public venues; artwork is now being covered by big ugly watermarks that stop you really being able to look at it, all because of the attitude “if it’s on the internet, it’s freeâ€.
I really wish that those of you who think like this, and who respond that the only solution for people who “whine†about copyright, and their work being stolen is for them to “not upload†what they want to keep would think about what their actually saying, and how unreasonable their being. If no one who created things uploaded them, can you imagine how boring the internet would be? And what about people who are trying to get jobs and become “known†in their fields? What opportunity will they have if they can’t upload their work to showcase to prospective employers? I often speak about artwork because I’m directly in that world, and you who aren’t have no frikken CLUE how hard it is to be noticed and become successful… if it wasn’t for being able to have galleries online, most artists would struggle to be “discoveredâ€.
I really wish that people would think about the implications of a situation beyond how it affects them and actually give a damn. There isn’t anything wrong with caring, and doing something about what you care about IS valuable and it DOES change things. The apathetic stupid attitude of “doesn’t affect me, I don’t care†is destroying so many things, that saying is very true, and I wish people would have the integrity and determination to care about things around them, no matter how it affects them – ‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothingâ€
Michael Rice
· 9 months ago
What's the big deal? I'm pretty sure it was your choice to sign up to Facebook.
Sending Anonymous Email
· 9 months ago
You have to be self aware and protect yourself online. Many people understand the need to have an alter ego online. Some of the social networks are a little more than intrusive.
You owe FB nothing. Take a stance and hit delete.
George
· 9 months ago
They pulled this nonsense when they allowed members' purchases to be shared with others without their knowledge or consent. After people made a fuss, then they said 'sorry' and offered an opt-out. They are taking advantage of their members' unsuspecting vulnerabilites once again. They don't care. They figure do whatever they want until people make a fuss. All they have to do - is say 'sorry' and offer an opt-out. Until then...they'll do whatever they hell they feel like.
Dave
· 9 months ago
If Facebook is taking the right to use anything that is published on its service, then are they also taking on the copyright infringement lawsuits of people who never authorized their content to be published in the first place? Why not dump a bunch of Warez, stolen music, pirated videos, links to P2P sites, etc all over here and let Facebook have all the ownership they want of a bunch of stolen property? Possession of stolen property is a crime - if stolen content is published, and Facebook automagically takes ownership of it then how can they not be held liable for the illegal possession and/or distribution of that content?
M
· 9 months ago
Amen to that. Then the record companies will go after them for storing the content.
kva
· 9 months ago
What are they going to do with all of our stuff in their site ?
tediber
· 9 months ago
crappy facebook..if it is not because of PETSOC i wouldn't really sign myself there.
Mario
· 9 months ago
I think that unless you are someone with so much importance, you don't really need to worry about this TSO change. After all, it's just mundane stuff you share!
coffee
· 9 months ago
now i'm glad i have stayed away from Facebook
Anton
· 9 months ago
The fact is, that if they make changes to their TOS they should give us the opportunity to opt out of their service, if we dont agree with the change.
But they probably covered their asses about that right at the beginning.
They keep credit card details which by the way is not collected via https <-- I'm not a boffin but I'm sure this is not very secure...
Cheers guys, not using facebook again.
janice
· 9 months ago
hello! why r we suprised? they don't care about peoples rights....they, the (Gov..ect) whoever. 'big brother helps them out...they can get almost any info about us that they want. we lost our rights long time ago...fight back, sure. but in the end they still win.
scott sanderson
· 9 months ago
There is no possible way that any facet of FACEBOOK could ever utilize our words to there full potential.. Even IF I am quoted, I know that I FOR ONE.. Have NO fear.. My words are far beyond any ownership.......... I'll simply state them else where ... - Scott A. Sanderson
Matt
· 7 months ago
Yeah but that is how social media goes. You are getting to marketing yourself for free.
Kimmy Sacony
· 7 months ago
This is gonna be obsolete.....soon
Anita
· 5 months ago
Thank you for pointing it out. I don't like it at all! Let us know what we can do to insist on this being corrected. What we post needs to be ours. Facebook may have the right to store it, if needed, but they don't have a right to use it for whatever they want!
chiropractors marketing
· 5 months ago
Well before signing up to anything we must simply read and study the rules and regulations , this is very important for us to understand more about their policies and things to do if we had done a mischief action, I admit facebook is one of the most effective ways to drive traffic to your site.
air jordan
· 4 months ago
yup, that is true, people just share their info with each other, you say yes to those who intends to upload the info when you add your info to twitter. BTW, please make sure your content is true.
charles fugitt
· 4 months ago
You two face bast take my name of your site are I well put your name and all I know about you on goggle,my friend.charles fugitt
Thanks for sharing this great lineup up of some of the larger brands that are taking advantage of Twitter and I am glad to that you were able to interview some of the people behind them because they are ALL leaders who should be recognized for pushing their companies into the conversation.Tiffany Jewellery
All Comments
way? More taking and less fun and giving.
Other than party pics (which I wouldn't use Twitter for), I'm finding
less and less reasons for visiting.
It's understandable that the content we create is more personal and private. But we need to remind ourselves that the state of internet is what we made it. We created an infrastructure of sharing and open source information.
If you want to protest, then I would suggest you take two actions:
1. Cancel your Facebook (or other social networking account). Most of the content we as private citizens create has little value other than its privacy to us.
2. Stop caring. Assume that the creative capital you put on the web is no longer yours. With this in mind, actively decide what you want to remain on your hard drive and what you have no need to solely control.
“That’s fairly common language in terms for various sites".
So why are we more vexed by Facebook doing this than, say, Google?
I am curious of the legality of this, offering no warning, therefore no chance to remove yourself/your stuff prior to these changes to the TOS
My husband did not have a facebook account, therefore had never accepted the terms of service from them... So, one day I was browsing and had found where someone had tagged him in a photo (He has a fairly unusual name, so he is easily searched for.) Well, he didn't want to be tagged in that particular photo, so he wrote facebook a letter, and they told him that they only way to remove his tag from the photo was to join facebook, and that he was required to accept their terms of service in order to join. They said there was no way on their end for them to remove the tag from the photo without him joining up. So, now he has a facebook account, and has accepted their TOS. Hello, Catch 22 :(
How is this any different than the klepto mindset of the average web user
who assumes ownership of anything they can scrounge up on p2p?
I am sure Facebook views the public availability of digital material no
different than most of the people using Facebook: free for the taking.
............................
Fact is, this is clearly a blatant infringement on creative output and the
arts should flee Facebook.
There needs to be regulations set on how sites can use content from users.
(MEMBERS WERE NOT NOTIFIED OF THIS VERY SERIOUS CHANGE) "fixed" their TOS to give tyrannical control of your personal data. What scare's me is the fact that this isn't some "off-the-beaten-path" social network here... It's arguably (since FaceBook Connect) the single most influential social network in the world.
This must be stopped by users making as much fuss as possible.
This isn't just about Facebook - it's about the direction of the internet.
IF YOU ARE READING THIS - make a choice to do SOMETHING about it. I am calling for a facebook boycott from within facebook... and ditching my account for all purposes EXCEPT to inform others about this mess.
Look, they are running out of cash, and clearly have no viable business model to deal with their growth..this is basically their last gasp at monetization, by owning millions of photos, streams, videos, content etc. Now you will see them selling all this stuff to spam lists, marketing companies, governments, etc... You better believe it, no stopping them now.
I am so happy I canceled my facebook account months ago, I knew they would do something like this.
I mean what more do you expect from a company that stole and cheated from its inception.
who's next? twitter? someone will notice that twitter can use their users tweet to something else?
Come on, people... we are all grown up here...
All users should receive some sort of email or notice,
or something when they make a change to the TOS. And this
isn't something I would have accepted to when I had first
opened my account.
My question coincides with olvado's.
How legal is this, making such a change
without prior warning, giving people a
chance to remove anything they'd like?
of Facebook, I just can't be bothered.
My point isn’t that this is a good or bad thing, rather that those of us who are most vocal about data privacy also tend to be pretty vocal about how all data is free, and copyright and DRM are outdated concepts. It’s not like someone from Napster called up EMI and said ‘This is a ten year warning, act now or your business won’t exist any more.’ What’s that? Oh.
Does this mean all of my blog posts are their intellectual property?
I feel a little sick to my stomach now thinking of all my art that is on there.
Hot link of the day: http://www.facebook.com/deactivate.php
EVERY SINGLE WEBSITE that you upload content to OWNS your data. This is not ANYTHING new.
GET OVER IT.
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/2/12/harry_lew...
1. If it's to ensure they don't get sued for other facebook connect sites caching your data, why don't they just put *that* into the FB connect TOS - saying, "we can't be held responsible for others caching your data"
2. Myspace has strict rules in their developer SDK about other sites caching users personal data, why can't FB?
3. Why do they need to use our data in advertising at all? Someone uploads a cool picture, just contact the author about using it, would probably take an hour tops.
4. How can they respect privacy settings (I set my photo to private, therefore FB can't advertise with it) but not respect privacy when I delete my account (the equivalent of setting ALL my content to private).
5. Speaking of Privacy settings they WILL respect, that seems to violate the idea that they are protecting themselves from another FB connect site caching your content. I could set a pic to private and then the other site would have to delete it? Great, why not when I delete my account?
Just to counteract those above who are saying" it's our fault cos we pinched MP3s", I hardly think that is fair as not everyone has done that and I bet there are a ton of users who only know how to use FB not torrents or whatever. Tarring everyone with the same brush isn't a valid argument this time me hearties. And what on earth has MP3s got to do with personal data, a more valid argument would be us stealing data from companies like how much the bonus was for this person and what salary this person was on and what their profits are on this model etc....but this is data stealing not product theft we are talking about....am I right or did I just go off on one for no reason?
but that doesn't mean that it's the right thing or even legal to just take it.
The Wild West is spreading everywhere. Soon it will be OK to grab anything that comes i your way - is not locked up or someone else is chained on to?
If I don't lock my car on the street, is it OK to steal it?
It will never be OK in my world....
I really don't like when serious (?) companies lower themselves like this.
Not everyone has pinched mp3's, to be sure. In reference to your claim: the
end product is still digital. It doesn't f'ing matter whether it is personal
or creative. It is still appropriated without express and specific permission.
I am somewhat agog at the overwhelming response here against an entity
pilfering digital property when this is, in fact, a common internet behavior
(whether the entity is a large corporation or your college buddy).
'Course, if all you responsive folk are creative producers then, of course,
the overwhelming backlash makes perfect sense because you have the most to
lose.
I add my voice to the chorus.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Jacob-Guay/13659...
We are not using FB to SELL our private data - if we were, that would change this picture.
From comment above: "For years we’ve lived off the idea that content on the net should be free. If record companies or movie studios release content digitally, millions of us have gone by the principal that we can take that content for ourselves and not pay for it. Their content is arguably much more valuable than ours yet now we seem to be uncomfortable with this idea when it comes back in our direction."
This misses the point entirely. If we were SELLING something and then FB said they had full rights to our work, then you could make a similar comparison.
I stopped putting photos up on FB ages ago and suggest that anyone who cares about their pictures watermark them, right across the middle of the photo... this way you get credit for it should they be used elsewhere.
I would also suggest you re-check your privacy settings... they may have mysteriously & suddenly changed since the new TOS.
Please join us!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=77069107432
Email opt out: "Opt out of receiving emails from Facebook.
Note: Even after you deactivate, your friends can still invite you to events, tag you in photos, or ask you to join groups. If you opt out, you will NOT receive these email invitations and notifications from your friends."
Look, people. There's NO escape. Like the PP said... it becomes a FB time capsule. There's really no clear way to delete it. The best you can do is delete ALL personal info (including pix), all friends, and change your name to "John Smith" and put your "network" (location) as NYC and just abandon it.
SELLING has nothing to do with anything. If I post a sketch that I have NO
plan to sell, neither you or Facebook have the right to acquire the image
for your personal or commercial use without specific permission to do so.
Right now, I'm just very happy that I don't use Facebook.
b.s propaganda vid, but worth the watch. http://albumoftheday.com/facebook
rights to use the text messages you sent over their network.
Facebook should be a conduit for content, not the user of the content.
Facebook is still saying the opposite.
USER CONTENT is NOOOOOOT facebook propert. Who the heck wrote this crap???
Or has that started already..? As a creative person, this gives me the willies.
maybe ya'll should actually read the TOS.
The clause that this article mentions, just states that when you upload something to facebook, they can post it...
And the second clause just states that if you cancel your account, you're still subjected to their TOS
other than that... ya'll are idiots. Facebook isn't going to sell your damn pictures.
Did ya'll really think they were?
so david's earthworm brain might actually comprehend what is stated:
Quote:
You hereby grant Facebook a perpetual, fully paid, worldwide license to
copy and create derivative works and distribute any User Content you post
on the Facebook Service.
internet, but this is just ridiculous. There is a reason that Facebook,
supposedly, gives us the right to control what other uses can see. Apparently,
however, our full name, face, and other information could appear in a
completely different city from where you live. That just completely defeats the
purpose of all of the privacy settings that we can modify.
That is not exactly true. In my home state of Virginia, it is against the law for anyone to use a recognizable picture of me (a private person) in a commercial manner without my written consent.
So if someone posts a picture of me and Facebooks decides to use it for something, they will have to defend that use in the Virginia Courts.
Public domain is not applicable (in most cases) when one is referring to
modern creative work.
Public domain covers work not copyrighted at all or the copyright has
expired.
anyone to see. If you are going to post something to facebook you should use
discretion. If I don't care about it I will post it. If I do then I will
think about what the possible consequence would be. Use your head and don't
post things that you don't want someone else to have access to or control over.
Ownership; Proprietary Rights
Except for User Content and Applications/Connect Sites, all materials, content and trademarks on the Facebook Service are the property of Facebook and/or its licensors and are protected by all relevant IP laws and other proprietary rights (including copyright, trademark, trade dress and patent laws) and any other applicable laws. Without limiting the foregoing, FACEBOOK, the F LOGO, FB, FACE, POKE, THE WALL and 32665 and all related logos, are trademarks of Facebook. Except as expressly authorized by Facebook in writing, you agree not to use, sell, license, distribute, copy, publish, stream, publicly perform or display, transmit, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works or otherwise make unauthorized use of the materials, content or trademarks.
all with a sneaky little change in an online Terms of Service agreement that no-one ever reads. Thank goodness for the bloggers!!
There should be a law against this!!! Its like the credit card companies changing the terms of service on their credit cards and all of a sudden jacking up your rates or changing the way they calculate interest on outstanding balances. Its outright theft!
not like alot of things.. im sure they also reserve the right to ban and delete
anyone they want at anytime FOR ANY REASON THEY FEEL FIT.. so before you go and
get all pissy about this and you dont want them using your stuff.. DELETE
first, close your account later.
social networking group use.
http://www.socialmediabuyingguide.org/post/inde...
information on FB on my blog: "Important Application settings to keep your information safe
on FB" Sure it doesn't solve the problem of the delete account issue but worth
looking into.
bringing to light the fact that the Facebook TOS is closer to the norm than the
exception. You can read my reflections here if you're interested: http://tinyurl.com/brfex9
to, like a famous picture?
I believe the vile shadow government controls Facebook.
Seriously, it is vile.
I deactivated my account a year ago and saw the controversy over the updated
TOS on the news. Is it retroactive?
Do you realize that by posting your response on this website you are doing the exact same thing?
This comment is now public domain and there is nothing I or you or anyone can do about it.
welcome to the 21st century. keep sharing this link on facebook. that'll do the trick!!!
I'm sure the IP address that this was sent from wa saved as well so anyone with decent access can even find out where I am sending this from
But the BIG difference between us taking stuff off of the internet and this,
is that we take it and use it THEY take it, and can (legally) do whatever
they want to it sell it distribute it or w/e
And to be clear, the license is in regards to the "promotion of the Facebook Platform". Yes, they can use your image in an ad, for example. If you delete your photo, they can still use it. If you don't own the rights to an image they use, you are in breach of their TOS because you uploaded the image.
This is just common sense.
They aren't going to run amok creating some kind of Getty Images "photos of people on Facebook for sale" service. Use your brain. Articles like this are boring, fear-mongering crap aimed at the very lowest common denominator.
"Mark Zuckerberg, creator of Facebook, doesn’t have his own Facebook page. I went through more than 50 “fan†and “join group†pages before it started again and he doesn’t have his own page. I wonder why?"
An example of someone who doesn't know how the Facebook privacy settings work. And moreover, the guy doesn't have a public profile specifically so he won't need to field thousands of messages from idiots on the internet. The license agreement complies with your privacy settings.
And please, fix your commenting system. It's crap. For a site that prides itself on "Web 2.0" coverage, you should at least be able to set up your form textboxes correctly.
NOTE: I would have a read through the terms of service before you upload anything you wouldn't want facebook to take ownership of.
http://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?post=54434097130
As for why they are doing it, Facebook Connect is one good reason. Another is that this kind of clause is practically required for them to be able to create thumbnails, rotate images for you, tag images, or do anything else that modifies your pictures. Google has had legal problems multiple times with their image search that displays thumbnails; the owners of the linked websites sued Google, claiming copyright infringement for creation of a derivative work. This type of clause in ToS protects the company from that. It also would allow them to do other things, but I seriously doubt they would take advantage of it; the PR implications would be horrid.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/1...
I hate others keeping my stuff without my permission!
Don't simplify a complicated state of affairs just to serve your inability
to rationalize information.
The internet is much more just a simple family hangout. It is also vast
marketplace and gallery for a myriad of creative content.
There are legal expectations attached to the ownership of creative work that
ha been submitted to the web that must be diligently maintained and overseen.
When one of the web's largest social network providers decides to 'adjust' a
TOS statement directly impacting the licensing of User Content (which
includes innumerable creative expressions contained within the network) it has
simply stepped into the light of investigation and oversight which is exactly
what this article and thread is about.
To simplify this into a family/friend affair, as many have done, illustrates
the void of knowledge out there on this matter.
However, the key is still not to post anything you don't want everyone to have access to. Such has been the lessons with MySpace.
Howard
to put any of my material up that I may use later, it is just common sense. The problem more lies in the principle. I didn't agree to those terms when I signed-up, and everything on my facebook was posted before the new TOS. So either we deserve a chance to take down what we don't want to possibly be used by facebook, or the new TOS does not apply to anything posted before prior to the
new TOS.
Pretty simple.
Servers are servers and they have to keep backups in case they go down. If they went dowm and then came back up and your information was gone, would you like it? Probably not.
All my base are belong to you, now?
1. Sharing IS the point of facebook. Without that user case, it has little value.
2. Other sites seem to have no problem with more fair terms of service. Flickr.com
doesn't suddenly get the rights to all your work. In fact, it allows you, the
user to set your own licensing terms for each content item. Why? Because it
wants intelligent and real photographers using their system, and not just
myspace teens.
FB could easily do the same, and simply allow the content to continue to belong to the poster.
if the legals can't figure out a way to respect our privacy while protecting
their butts, then they shouldn't have ventured into social networking.
I'm incensed and what a wasteful shame.
I’m currently not inclined to set up my own server and write the code for my own social networking community (yet).
I haven’t been getting any unwanted solicitations from FB since I started using it. I haven’t seen an increase in SPAM, and I haven’t seen a intrusion on my privacy that I haven’t already condoned before deciding to use FB. As I understand, FB’s intentions are genuine and not out to harm people.
Moreover, I’m curious, how many of us (including myself) have posted on FB pictures of friends before asking for their permission? Wouldn’t that be a violation of their privacy as well?
Social networking via the internet involves trust on a medium that is free and open to the public at large, and I know that I have control as well as responsibility over what I post.
The terms and conditions are to protect Facebook from pathetic lawsuits. They
don't at anytime claim ownership of your materials, merely a license to use it. If all Lawyers were chopped up & fed to fish this type of ToS wouldn't be required to cover their arses.
Then in December 2006 they started broadcasting the things you bought online to all your friends. No, I didn't have any holiday surprises ruined... but the idea that they did all that without asking for an opt-in offended me. And so I decided to delete my Facebook account. I delinked my blog from it, took down everything I could. And then went to delete it. That is when I found out you can't delete a Facebook account. You can only "deactivate" it. I got this email:
***
Your Facebook account has been deactivated.
To reactivate your account, simply log in as you normally would, and we'll send you a reactivation email.
Come back soon,
The Facebook Team
***
So they still have *some* amount of my info in their servers. And now they claim to own it. Grrrr.
go on it anymore.
A couple of weeks ago, we posted an update to our Terms of Use that we hoped would clarify some parts of it for our users. Over the past couple of days, we have received a lot of questions and comments about these updated terms and what they mean for people and their information. Because of the feedback we received, we have decided to return to our previous Terms of Use while we resolve the issues that people have raised.
Terms of Use Update
Close
Over the past few days, we have received a lot of feedback about the new terms we posted two weeks ago. Because of this response, we have decided to return to our previous Terms of Use while we resolve the issues that people have raised.
If you want to share your thoughts on our new terms, check out our group Facebook Bill of Rights and Responsibilities.
Power to the people!
security pro I know that companies look at your facebook when recruiting, the police can find out more about you there than in any of their leads. All Your Bases Are Belong To Us
Professional's have DEEP concern about copyright issues, most pro artists DON'T behave the way other's do, we don't download music & movies illegally and we don't assume everything on the internet is free. We have an understanding of copyright laws and what it actually means to spend hours, days and months to create something original and have it stolen from you by people who don't give you any credit and in a way that doesn't benefit you financially. The mind-set that "everything on the internet is free use, and if you don't like it, don't upload shit and don't complain if someone steals your stuff" is completely retarded; although I can understand it (it's very easy to assume something doesn't matter if it doesn't affect you). However if you just take a moment and actually imagine what the internet would be like if artists of all kinds decided to take on that advice, and didn't upload anything they weren't willing to give away for free… what would the internet actually be like?
Would you be able to enjoy looking at amazing artwork on websites like DeviantArt, or ConceptArts, or CGSociety, would you be able to learn for free directly from the masters you admire through the work they share on sites like that? Would you be able to hop through MySpace profiles listening to music from fringe, indie and alternative bands, finding new favorites? Would you be able to enjoy all kinds of content on YouTube, put there by pro’s who want to reach new audiences?
No, you’d have to buy the books, DVD’s, CD’s or simply never, ever be exposed to it.
I’m old enough o remember what it was like before the internet, and to look at something that interested me I’d have to watch TV, go to the library or buy magazines… and even then I had an extremely limited selection. Now, I have an unlimited mind-boggling access to the entire world, I learn something new everyday, I see something amazing everyday.
The internet is an incredible tool for learning and discovering new things, seeing amazing things you’d never otherwise see. But if you treat it with disrespect as if it’s some right that you can shit all over and the people who provide all of that amazing content should just suck it up and be grateful to you…. It will eventually go away. Artists are already pulling their work from public venues; artwork is now being covered by big ugly watermarks that stop you really being able to look at it, all because of the attitude “if it’s on the internet, it’s freeâ€.
I really wish that those of you who think like this, and who respond that the only solution for people who “whine†about copyright, and their work being stolen is for them to “not upload†what they want to keep would think about what their actually saying, and how unreasonable their being. If no one who created things uploaded them, can you imagine how boring the internet would be? And what about people who are trying to get jobs and become “known†in their fields? What opportunity will they have if they can’t upload their work to showcase to prospective employers? I often speak about artwork because I’m directly in that world, and you who aren’t have no frikken CLUE how hard it is to be noticed and become successful… if it wasn’t for being able to have galleries online, most artists would struggle to be “discoveredâ€.
I really wish that people would think about the implications of a situation beyond how it affects them and actually give a damn. There isn’t anything wrong with caring, and doing something about what you care about IS valuable and it DOES change things. The apathetic stupid attitude of “doesn’t affect me, I don’t care†is destroying so many things, that saying is very true, and I wish people would have the integrity and determination to care about things around them, no matter how it affects them – ‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothingâ€
the need to have an alter ego online. Some of the social networks are a
little more than intrusive.
You owe FB nothing. Take a stance and hit delete.
with others without their knowledge or consent. After people made a fuss, then
they said 'sorry' and offered an opt-out. They are taking advantage of their
members' unsuspecting vulnerabilites once again. They don't care. They figure
do whatever they want until people make a fuss. All they have to do - is say
'sorry' and offer an opt-out. Until then...they'll do whatever they hell they
feel like.
service, then are they also taking on the copyright infringement lawsuits of
people who never authorized their content to be published in the first place?
Why not dump a bunch of Warez, stolen music, pirated videos, links to P2P
sites, etc all over here and let Facebook have all the ownership they want of
a bunch of stolen property? Possession of stolen property is a crime - if
stolen content is published, and Facebook automagically takes ownership of it
then how can they not be held liable for the illegal possession and/or
distribution of that content?
Then the record companies will go after them for storing the content.
But they probably covered their asses about that right at the beginning.
They keep credit card details which by the way is not collected via https <-- I'm not a boffin but I'm sure this is not very secure...
Cheers guys, not using facebook again.