Facebook is like herpes ... forever

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
The new TOS state that they have perpetual rights to anything and everything you post on their site.

If you have an account, enjoy your Internet immortality.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,494064,00.html

Facebook Membership May Be Forever

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Once a Facebook member, always a member.

The Consumerist blog noticed Sunday that the social-networking giant had quietly made a change to its user Terms of Service (TOS) on Feb. 4.

Facebook now declares that it has a perpetual license to use anything you post to your own Facebook page — even if you terminate your account.

Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg defended the change as necessary in a blog posting Monday afternoon.

Click here for the Consumerist blog posting.

Click here for Mark Zuckerberg's response.

Click here for the new Facebook Terms of Service.

Click here for the old Facebook Terms of Service.

Click here for FOXNews.com's Personal Technology Center.

Here's the licensing part of the legalese, which sounds bad enough:

"You hereby grant Facebook an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to (a) use, copy, publish, stream, store, retain, publicly perform or display, transmit, scan, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works and distribute (through multiple tiers), any User Content you (i) Post on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof subject only to your privacy settings or (ii) enable a user to Post, including by offering a Share Link on your website and (b) to use your name, likeness and image for any purpose, including commercial or advertising, each of (a) and (b) on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof."

In other words, while it doesn't actually own your photos, scribblings and status updates — you do — Facebook can do whatever it wants with it, whenever it wants, in order to promote itself or create or sell ads.

Theoretically, it can even "license" a picture of your kids for use in a third party's ad campaign.

Most of that has been part of the Facebook Terms of Service for a while. After all, without user-generated content, Facebook would be nothing.

What's been removed is this: "If you choose to remove your User Content, the license granted above will automatically expire, however (sic) you acknowledge that the Company may retain archived copies of your User Content."

And what's been added is this: "The following sections will survive any termination of your use of the Facebook Service" — after which follows a list of most of the sections on the Terms of Service page.

So even if you decide Facebook isn't for you, the site can still use anything you posted. It's all been archived.

"I'm done with Facebook," declared blogger Ed Champion upon learning of the TOS changes.

He seemed more annoyed at the older blanket license than the new never-say-die part of the legalese — ironic considering that if he'd deleted his account before Feb. 4 his account really would have been gone for good.

In his blog posting, Zuckerberg explained that the language had to be tweaked to resolve a conflict over ownership of messages posted by one Facebook user onto another user's page.

"When a person shares something like a message with a friend, two copies of that information are created — one in the person's sent messages box and the other in their friend's inbox," he writes. "Even if the person deactivates their account, their friend still has a copy of that message."

Zuckerberg then makes a subtle but persuasive legal argument.

"People also want to be able to bring the information others have shared with them — like email addresses, phone numbers, photos and so on — to other services and grant those services access to those people's information," he points out.

"These two positions are at odds with each other. There is no system today that enables me to share my email address with you and then simultaneously lets me control who [sic] you share it with and also lets you control what services you share it with."
 
Ha! What a difference a day makes ... or even a few minutes. FIVE to be exact. BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,495305,00.html

Facebook Does About-Face on Privacy Change

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Yielding to pressure from its users and privacy advocates, Facebook Inc. Tuesday night backed away from controversial changes to its terms of use that some had decried as giving the social network too much leeway with users' personal information.

Just a day after standing by the revisions, the company said it would scrap the new policy and return to its previous terms of service in a notice to its 175 million users on its Web site.

"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," read the statement, which Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg expanded upon in a blog post. "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."

He added that the company would work on a "substantial revision" of the terms and give Facebook users a role in crafting it by voicing their opinions through a group on its Web site, "Facebook Bill of Rights and Responsibilities."

The retreat comes after users and privacy professionals raised concerns about changes the company made to its terms of service a few weeks ago but that drew fresh attention from some blogs over the weekend. In particular, Facebook's new policy said that its right to use and modify a users' content did not automatically expire if the user removed the information from the site.

Click here for FOXNews.com's Personal Technology Center.

Privacy advocates expressed concern that the terms gave Facebook too broad a right over a users' information, going beyond the terms established by other social media sites. Mr. Zuckerberg initially defended the changes in a blog post Monday, saying they were designed merely to clarify issues the old policy didn't adequately address. In particular, Facebook wanted to reflect the fact that content users remove from the site continues to exist if they shared it with other Facebook members.

The outcry continued, as tens of thousands of members protested the moves by joining groups on Facebook. Mr. Zuckerberg announced the decision to revert to the old policy in a second blog post late Tuesday night. After consulting a range of "outside experts," the company decided to re-establish the terms that existed before Feb. 4, he wrote.
 
You guys act like the entire rest of the internet isn't exactly the same way...
 
Who care about those stupid pictures anyway.

Well! Welcome back!

The police routinely go through the Facebook and My Space accounts of those who are under arrest or investigation. People post stupid shit on those all of the time.

Here's a typical example. What do you think the cops and prosecutors could make of that?
 
Well! Welcome back!

The police routinely go through the Facebook and My Space accounts of those who are under arrest or investigation. People post stupid shit on those all of the time.

Here's a typical example. What do you think the cops and prosecutors could make of that?

Well first of all thank you... second of all it is those people own stupid fault for posting them in the first place. if they don't want to be caught or not have anybody use them, then don't upload them.
 
Back
Top