Discussions
The new Facebook TOS... what do you think??
Posted by nosheeping • 2/16/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: facebook, facebook content, facebook tos, facebookers, social media
If you haven't heard about the new Facebook Terms of Service.. its a little scary. Check out my post at nosheeping.blogspot.com/2009/02/facebook-users-you-have-given-away.html for some more information.
What is the reasoning behind it?
I've seen a few protest groups go up on Facebook and one friend on a rant even said he was removing his profile, and I've talked to a few people who could care less.
I'm interested to know.. what do you think? Does it change how you feel about FB?
User Comments
-
I was outraged! I demand more kicks in the knackers and different fonts. -
One more reason I don't accept friend requests on Facebook anymore. And I also give a lot of thumbs-down on the ads. Mwahahahahah!
-
Haha... I don't accept 'friends' I don't know either! (kinda creepy!)... hadn't thought of the thumbs down on ads- I should start doing that! If there was a way to veto them all I would! I understand they are a business and have to make money some how but somethings (the TOS) just go too far!
-
Go to the side of your profile page where the ads are. There is a thumbs up and a thumbs down mark beneath each. You can vote on what ads you dislike. I tend to give the thumbs-down mostly on religious ads and on ads for gay-lesbian dating because I'm not gay or lesbian (despite the opinion of some people).
-
-
Hello big brother! Yeah, that's creepy.
*quietly smirks knowing I've never once uploaded or conducted any business of Facebook*
Heh.-
Don't lie!! I have seen your advert
Desperate Ninja seeks sexual congress of any kind.... ANY KIND!!!!!
Please send two dollars and a piece of chewed gum to this address, applicants will be sorted by the flavour left within supplied gum.
No Welsh! -
[*** Hides hides in the shadows also smirking and snickering as she has carefully avoided going near that place. ***]
-
@dearaardvaark
You know that I'm married and Irish so behave yourself,
lest I take a shillelagh to you.
When Facebook came out with Beacon, it created somewhat of an uproar once people realized just how much of their personal information was being relayed to others. Some Facebook users were not bothered by it but a lot of them were not so happy. Even the bothered users continued to use Facebook despite their concerns because they had so much time invested in it and did not want to lose their network. -
@ TT, rrrrrrrrrrr...meowwwwww....ahhh get off.....Sorry, I mean rrrrrr.
-
@dearaardvaark
OOpS! I forgot that you can lie about your
relationship status on a$$book and cause a furor.
Some harmless flirting is fine but if you're getting an a$$book account, we shall have to part company. And I don't cotton to you hanging it out over at lostspaces either. -
Did someone say shillelagh? I'm so in.
Not on facebook, though. I won't be publishing that over there! And Anin is just mad because his gum sample was horrid.
On a serious note, though, I had heard about Facebook's invasive policies long before this new TOS, and was instantly turned off by it. -
@Anok
Not to brag or anything but when it comes to the use of the blackthorn walking stick I excel. The snooty little gang of girls, who picked on me when I had to go to public school for a couple of weeks, probably still recall the drubbing I gave all three of them.
The Principal didn't know what to say to me as I stood there with my ass length hair, in a blue ankle length dress, with a white bib apron holding my shillelagh and defiantly said: "It's mine. I'm not on school property and I will not give it to you." He led the three bawl babies out of the vacant lot back to the schoolyard.
Just to be clear here the three little b*tches ridiculed my clothes, my boots, and my hair and called me names for 12 days before I let loose and beat the crap out of them. -
*note to self, beware of Time thieves with walking sticks....
-
[*** Shush ... I edited out the knife throwing to create a better impression and increase my chances of a successful unexpected attack ***]
-
We'll get along just fine, TT
-
ROFL!!!!!
-
-
I haven't done facebook in years, and there is good reason why. -
I guess I'm lucky, since I never caught on to the Facebook craze. Makes me wonder how many other sites are going to do the same, though. -
I think its interesting that so many people who are replying are the 'smart and lucky' ones who tend to not use Facebook. While I appreciate the feelings of vindication of being 'right' after so many years holding out in the face of facebookers asking why they hadn't joined yet and the social pressure to join the club. But there are a lot of people out there who are on facebook.. where are you facebookers?
I am still interested to hear the views of others if there are any active facebook users out there. Are you mad at facebook? Do you not care at all? Thoughts?-
(1) I'd suggest trying the the Search utilities
www.blogcatalog.com/search
and using the Social filter.
That way you can locate BC members who are updating their facebook accounts and who are discussing this.
Here are the Social search results www.blogcatalog.com/dashboard.search.php?q=facebook
* All results www.blogcatalog.com/topic/facebook/
* Directory www.blogcatalog.com/blogsearch/facebook/
* Blog posts www.blogcatalog.com/posts/facebook/
* Blog tags www.blogcatalog.com/tag/facebook/
* Post tags www.blogcatalog.com/post-tag/facebook/
(2) I wouldn't recommend that you expecting that they will visit the forum and post to this thread. Most members do not post to the forum. IMO the next step is for you to connect with the BC members who you see discussing this in the results of the Social I did for you.
The situation sucks - best wishes. -
I used Facebook every day until the TOS change. It had put me back in touch with dozens of high school and college friends I hadn't talked to for varying periods of time--many of whom I only communicated with on FB and had to cut loose again in order to abruptly stop using the service.
-
-
I don't even include Facebook on my communities list in BC. But that's largely because I've never been able to find a "status stories" page on mine anyhow. I guess Facebook pulled it because I don't have friends there. Who cares now?
-
pretty much every social networking site in existence has an almost identical TOS. Yes, it's a crappy policy, but honestly....
Let's not all get so egotistical as to think that we are so important that facebook/myspace/whatever is EVER going to borrow or sell our photos. It's usual legal speak, drafted by lawyers with a disconnect from the day to day operations of the sites. Read the myspace TOS...or any of the online contests Maxim or those sort of companies hold - they all have the same rights grabbing TOS.
The Terms of Service are written by people who are payed to cover the asses of their employers. It is pretty unlikely that Facebook or Myspace is suddenly going to decide to sell random-suzie's profile picture of her with a beer bong in her mouth at the frat party to Microsoft or something.
The TOS language is stupid, but honestly is no real threat to anyone.
As an advertising photographer, I'm pretty anal about copyright issues, and while in theory this is something obnoxious - I'm not particularly worried by it. There is no profit to be gained by facebook from selling photos of random drunk people. -
The Facebook TOS language is more complex and sinister than many of the other sites, but it more or less says the same thing that every other website says...just in more ridiculous and comma-filled terms. Yes, they should modify their TOS to be less anger-inducing, but while it may piss a lot of people off the way it is now, I doubt we are going to see facebook selling their content in some sort of stock image library any time soon. I think it's good that people express their feelings about it - perhaps facebook will come up with a better TOS, but in the mean-time I wouldn't lose much sleep over it.
Facebook.com TOS:
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.
Myspace.com TOS:
By displaying or publishing ("posting") any Content on or through the MySpace Services, you hereby grant to MySpace a limited license to use, modify, delete from, add to, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce, and distribute such Content solely on or through the MySpace Services, including without limitation distributing part or all of the MySpace Website in any media formats and through any media channels, except Content marked “private” will not be distributed outside the MySpace Website.
Photobucket.com TOS:
By displaying or publishing ("posting") any Content on or through the Photobucket Services, you hereby grant to Photobucket and other users a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, worldwide, limited license to use, modify, delete from, add to, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce and translate such Content, including without limitation distributing part or all of the Site in any media formats through any media channels, except Content marked "private" will not be distributed outside the Photobucket Services.
BlogCatalog.com TOS:
With respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of BlogCatalog, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Service solely for the purposes of providing and promoting the specific BlogCatalog to which such Content was submitted or made available. -
Zuckerberg writes, “In reality, we wouldn’t share your information in a way you wouldn’t want. The trust you place in us as a safe place to share information is the most important part of what makes Facebook work.”
Really? Then add this “you retain all ownership rights.” -
My updated comments are here: nosheeping.blogspot.com/2009/02/facebook-update.html
I'm obviously more upset than most
But I'm a photographer and constantly have to be on guard about copyright, models rights, where I publish my work so no one uses it for profit (though I'm all for creative commons licenses).
Just silly. If you want to compare TOS check out Amanda French's article amandafrench.net/2009/02/16/facebook-terms-of-service-compared/ Facebook's is still decidedly worse. Though I agree that you need to be aware that whatever information you put online becomes subject to the world of 'public information'. Its one thing for facebook to say they cant control what other users do with your content once you have published it where other users can get see it (Flikr and a lot of photo places have clauses like that- ie if someone else infringes on your copyright its up to you to sue them if you want to)... but its something else entirely for facebook to say 'WE OWN YOUR CONTENT!". Not we cant control what others do with it.. but we have the right to take your content and do whatever we see fit with it (including sell it!).-
What's the TOS on Deviant art? Do you know? It might be better.
-
the likelihood of any multi-BILLION dollar company trying to make a few bucks off of some ridiculously small, web-sized images that are of such low quality over-all is just nonexistent. Even if they wanted to start some sort of evil stock-image library they would need much larger images than are typically uploaded to facebook.
-
Anok - you can find the TOS of any website(if they have such terms) at the bottom of the page.
-
I was just bringing it up so that if the OP wanted to, he/she could check it out.
i don't use Deviant art, facebook, myspace et al so I don't actually care
-
-
In a way, I think it's great that it's getting a lot of attention. Maybe it will cause people to stop a moment and think about what it means to upload their content to different places and what ownership and licensing can mean. I try to be aware, but I admit that I had a moment of panic and looked up the Wordpress.com TOS to make sure that if I removed something, they would no longer have license to use it (and that is the case).
It is worth noting that you retain ownership of your content, facebook does not own it, you are just granting them license to do with it as they please. It's a subtle but important distinction. If they owned your content, they could tell you to stop distributing it elsewhere, and that's not happening.
I have decided that I will not upload or write notes that I might ever want to publish elsewhere. Instead I will link to it from fb, which is what I was doing most of the time, anyway. Since I am not a photographer or artist, I'm not as concerned about the images I post (other than the normal being careful about only posting things I don't mind if other people see). Otherwise, you can bet I'd stop adding any of it immediately. -
@annz
It is worth noting that you retain ownership of your content, facebook does not own it, you are just granting them license to do with it as they please. It's a subtle but important distinction. If they owned your content, they could tell you to stop distributing it elsewhere, and that's not happening. ... I have decided that I will not upload or write notes that I might ever want to publish elsewhere.
Thanks for posting about this important distinction and for sharing how you intend to proceed.
BTW this is currently a top topic being discussed on twitter search.twitter.com/search?q=facebook+tos -
I just read the following article where Facebook tries to clarify their position-- "Facebook: Oh, Nevermind About That Content Thing"
www.adotas.com/2009/02/facebook-oh-never-mind-about-that-content-thing/ -
Lol,
I love how you call the ads on facebook a "sellout". Meanwhile there is a nice "frame" of adsense content on your own blog. -
I might be wrong, but if they change the TOS after you've posted the content, don't they need explicit documentation stating that you understand the new TOS? I don't think just retroactively changing the content terms actually carries any legal standing, could be wrong, but you know, not usually -
I believe that you are correct, and it would only apply to new content added since the change in TOS.
-
No. Websites change their terms of service constantly and they have language in the terms which allows them to do so, as much as they want. Once you have already signed up for the service, they don't have to track down millions of people every time they update the legal jargon.
"By using or accessing the Facebook Service, you agree that you have read, understand and are bound by these Terms of Use ("Terms"). We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to change or delete portions of these Terms at any time without further notice. Your continued use of the Facebook Service after any such changes constitutes your acceptance of the new Terms." -
Yuck and barf.
Well here's a different way out of the puzzle. I cross post from my blog to my Facebook page. Years down the road after my book gets published and I'm hailed as the literary genius of my time, my blog entries are collected and published as a book. My Facebook page has been shut down by this point but Facebook still has the content. By allowing a publisher to print my blogs I am granting sole copyright to them for the purpose of commercial distribution. The publisher can then sue Facebook for the removal of the content from their servers as my transfer of commercial copyright precludes Facebook's option based on tacit permissions.
So, all I need to do is post something like this on my Profile page;
"By archiving or displaying copyrighted material provided by me (Julian Finn) you (Facebook Service) agree that this material is protected under sole copyright by myself and no transfer of rights is implied by my use of your service. I reserve the right, at my sole discretion, to transfer copyright of these materials, in their entirety, to any third party publication I choose. Your continued archiving, display, or other use of these materials after any such transfers constitutes intellectual theft and copyright violation."
Do you think that might do it? ;p -
Can you just cross post links to your blog posts, rather than the full content? That's what I'm planning to do.
-
-
So here's the link to NBCi's story on the issue with a response from Facebook.
Its nowhere near as bad as people are making it out to be.
www.nbc4i.com/cmh/news/local/article/The_411_On_Facebooks_New_Terms_Of_Serv...-
most people have simply never bothered to read the TOS of any website, and so when they actually bother to read one it comes as quite a shock. I don't see it as a big deal, because the language is not intended to steal anything from any users - it's just to cover facebook's legal ass....and for good reasons.
-
@intarso
You are right. Most bloggers never read Terms of Service. Those who do read them often have creative interpretations of what they state that are in opposition to what is actually stated.
-
-
This is what I found
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.
Our photo should not belong to them according to this term-
that's not the part people are all worried about, this is:
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. -
Oh .. IC ..
I guess I'm like most of people who never read any TOS carefully then .. what a shame.
Btw, in that case ... I do have to worry too ..
-
-
Hey guys, I logged into my account today and there's a notice saying that b/c of peoples responses (I'm assume mainly negative), they've returned to the previous terms of use!
-
Yes what's wrong can someone please explain me in brief.. I don't have time to read their TOS & I don't wanna scroll up again.. -
I got this message today
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.
This should be a good news, right? -
Due to the overwhelming response from the Facebook community, Facebook has reverted back to the old TOS!!!
The masses spoke and Facebook had no choice but to respond (this little controversy spread so fast that they were even talking about it on The View).
While it is a victory (hopefully not too short term as they said they are still discussing how to change the TOS and the reversion back to the old TOS is only temporary), many questions remain unanswered...
Namely where is the legal line drawn for what FB can do with our content? How drastic of a change can they make to their TOS without consent (apparently they can change anything unless their is an uproar)? Can they change the TOS to say that they can keep our content forever or use it for their own financial gain (again without our consent), which they just tried to do?
Some people were unconcerned with the change, and perhaps it was an overreaction and FB really was only trying to 'legally cover their asses'. But they wrote it to such an extent that if they wanted to it gave them massive power. Its not to say they have tested that power, and perhaps they never would have (its also questionable whether they legally could have). But how the now removed TOS was written gave them a lot of power and control over the users content- allowing them to do basically anything they wanted with it (including sell it which seems to go against all types of copyright law).
Now the discussion has moved on to how FB can 'legally cover themselves', still be able to do what they want to do (which is as of yet unclear because it seems to be one step beyond just covering themselves), and how to keep users happy knowing that their content is safe, still owned by them, and that FB is not making too many claims to that content now and into 'perpetuity'.
For Facebook's side of the story head over to blog.facebook.com.-
"Namely where is the legal line drawn for what FB can do with our content? How drastic of a change can they make to their TOS without consent (apparently they can change anything unless their is an uproar)? Can they change the TOS to say that they can keep our content forever or use it for their own financial gain (again without our consent), which they just tried to do?"
They sure can. Then you have to decide whether you want to consent to those terms by continuing to use FB or reject them by leaving.
-
-
@madameX
Can they change the TOS to say that they can keep our content forever or use it for their own financial gain (again without our consent), which they just tried to do? ... They sure can. Then you have to decide whether you want to consent to those terms by continuing to use FB or reject them by leaving."
Yes, indeed they can and you have clarified what the solution is for those who do not wish to consent to the TOS.
What's also more important that Zuckerman's backing down statement is what intarso pointed out above:
Websites change their terms of service constantly and they have language in the terms which allows them to do so, as much as they want. Once you have already signed up for the service, they don't have to track down millions of people every time they update the legal jargon.
"By using or accessing the Facebook Service, you agree that you have read, understand and are bound by these Terms of Use ("Terms"). We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to change or delete portions of these Terms at any time without further notice. Your continued use of the Facebook Service after any such changes constitutes your acceptance of the new Terms."-
They don't have to track us down, that's true. It's interesting, though, that CHOSE to make sure the switch BACK was announced to people logging in, but didn't make that same choice when they originally changed the TOS.
-
Yes, it sure is a fascinating comparison of choices, isn't it?
-
-
It's the invasion of the privacy! Not good! -
did you see the note they put up the other day disclaiming it??-
“You Have Zero Privacy Anyway. Get Over It”–That Goes Double on Social Networks
kara.allthingsd.com/20090216/you-have-zero-privacy-anyway-get-over-it-that-...
Secret settlement in Facebook Connect U suit accidentally revealed
www.collegenews.com/index.php?/article/secret_settlement_in_facebook_connec...
On Facebook, People Own and Control Their Information
blog.facebook.com/blog.php?post=54434097130
Facebook backs off changes to terms of service
www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/02/18/facebook-terms.html
-
-
This is why i don't use facebook:
"Privacy
We care about the privacy of our users. Click here to view the Facebook's Privacy Policy. By using the Site or the Service, you are consenting to have your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States."
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
