Change the Facebook TOS

[tuxotaku]

Some of you may have heard by now about the new Terms of Service currently in use for Facebook. If you have not, I STRONGLY advise you to take a look at the article on The Consumerist (http://consumerist.com/5150175/facebooks-new-terms-of-service-we-can-do-anything-we-want-with-your-content-forever) regarding them. It is completely wrong what they are doing and as a result, I have started a Petition, My hope with this petition is to eventually present it to the EFF (http://www.eff.org/) in hopes that they will be willing to make a case against Facebook regarding their new TOS.

It is my belief that we can affect serious change and get Facebook's attention with this. I hope there are at least a few of you out there who are as optimistic and as willing as I, because we as users and common citizens MUST NOT stand for this.

[comhcinc]

who are you? why is your sig so big? why are you spamming a digg story?

[tuxotaku]

I'm not spamming, I'm just trying to make people aware that there is someone out there trying to do something about this ridiculous new TOS.

[comhcinc]

what exactly is rediculous about it mr sig longer than anything i have to say?

[masherscf]

I'm not spamming, I'm just trying to make people aware that there is someone out there trying to do something about this ridiculous new TOS.

Indeed, this is an important story. Nevertheless, linking to Digg stories or Online Petitions is considered spam my the forum rules of conduct.

People can find your story in your digg profile.

[tuxotaku]

True enough I suppose. Any mods listening, feel free to edit the initial post as you see fit, but please don't lock the thread or remove it.

[masherscf]

True enough I suppose. Any mods listening, feel free to edit the initial post as you see fit, but please don't lock the thread or remove it.

Deletion is the usual remedy. You'll notice this hasn't happened. Like I said, this is an important story. As a photographer, I'm particularly annoyed. I just deleted all my photos from Facebook.

[esophagus]

I've seen this in the news a lot recently and am amazed it is just now becoming an issue. Facebook has been huge for years. People need to do a little more research before they join things. Facebook has always stated this very plainly in their ToS and everytime you sign up for a new application.

If someone else hadn't signed me up years ago before I read any of this myself I would never have it.

[comhcinc]

what exactly are you posting on facebook that you are afraid to lose?

[masherscf]

what exactly are you posting on facebook that you are afraid to lose?

Photographs mostly.

[esophagus]

what exactly are you posting on facebook that you are afraid to lose?
The problem isn't losing it, its what they can do with it.

Facebook has a database of names, birthdays and locations of millions of people and pictures of most of them that they keep even after you remove them and they can do whatever they want with them, including sell them.

[tuxotaku]

what interests ME though, is this little tidbit from their TOS:

"...any User Content you (i) Post on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof subject only to your privacy settings..."

Does that mean that so long as you lock your profile down, they can't touch you?

[comhcinc]

that is what i mean. What are you afraid facebook is going to do exactly?

[esophagus]

that is what i mean. What are you afraid facebook is going to do exactly?It is just the potential for bad that seems to be scaring people. Its a lot of power to hold over people.

[masherscf]

that is what i mean. What are you afraid facebook is going to do exactly?

Facebook is adding to it's terms and conditions that it was the rights to use, copy and sell any content uploaded to Facebook in perpetuity without the permission of the copyright holder. This includes photos and videos.

[xibalba]

I removed the few photos I did have on there.

[esophagus]

I know that when you deactivate your account they keep the information, but I don't know if they do after you PERMANENTLY delete your account. I'll have to try and find this out.

[tuxotaku]

another question I have is, say you have content that is already licensed, we'll say through Creative Commons or some such...are those licenses null-and-void once you post that content to Facebook?

[comhcinc]

Facebook is adding to it's terms and conditions that it was the rights to use, copy and sell any content uploaded to Facebook in perpetuity without the permission of the copyright holder. This includes photos and videos.

yeah i know. what i am asking is what is everyone afraid of. what do you think facebook is going to do with your pictures that has people upset?

It is just the potential for bad that seems to be scaring people. Its a lot of power to hold over people.

that what gets me. i think of the couple of personal pics i have on there and the other things i have seen people post on their accounts and i don't see a "potential for bad"

[phatlip]

yeah i know. what i am asking is what is everyone afraid of. what do you think facebook is going to do with your pictures that has people upset?


Well, as he said they may potentially sell or use your photos however they choose. So, that's the fear.

[tokenuser]

Photographs mostly.Uh uh ... you are losing CONTROL over the use of those photographs ... and that is even worse.

[rabidbadger]

There is an updated story, now. Facebook responds (http://consumerist.com/5154745/facebook-clarifies-terms-of-service-we-do-not-own-your-stuff-forever?skyline=true&s=x).

[masherscf]

Uh uh ... you are losing CONTROL over the use of those photographs ... and that is even worse.

If one was to take the wording of the TOC literally, your surrendering your copyright by using Facebook.

[phatlip]

Here's another thought.

I have my cell phone number posted on my Facebook but only viewable to my friends. So, doesn't this new TOS agreement technically give Facebook the right to do what they want with that number?

So, if I magically start getting calls from telemarketers I know who to blame.

Hmm....

[phatlip]

Oh, another thing. This TOS agreement wasn't in effect when I signed up. Don't they have to send me an email requiring I accept? Can they really just add whatever they want at a later date. What the hell is this, some sort of stuck for life sort of deal?

[esophagus]

Here's another thought.

I have my cell phone number posted on my Facebook but only viewable to my friends. So, doesn't this new TOS agreement technically give Facebook the right to do what they want with that number?

So, if I magically start getting calls from telemarketers I know who to blame.

Hmm....It is limited to your privacy settings. Unless your cell phone number was set as viewable to the whole world there is no problem. Even then, I don't think that is the kind of thing Facebook is trying to do with this.

[rabidbadger]

what if I make everything private tonight? Is it retroactive?

[esophagus]

what if I make everything private tonight? Is it retroactive?Yes.

I don't understand what people think Facebook is doing. I get why the wording is frightening, but it has always been there. Until Facebook announces some new evil plan I'm not too worried. That article Badger posted basically lines it all up. There's nothing really going on here.

[phatlip]

Yes.

I don't understand what people think Facebook is doing. I get why the wording is frightening, but it has always been there. Until Facebook announces some new evil plan I'm not too worried. That article Badger posted basically lines it all up. There's nothing really going on here.

According to the Consumerist article it hasn't always been there. They added the part saying they keep your data even after you close your account. That's the issue.

An evil plan doesn't need to be announced. Would you agree to such a contract in real life all because an "evil plan" wasn't announced? Of course not. When you put something on Facebook you're giving your rights away to that content. FOREVER.


http://consumerist.com/5150175/facebooks-new-terms-of-service-we-can-do-anything-we-want-with-your-content-forever (http://consumerist.com/5150175/facebooks-new-terms-of-service-we-can-do-anything-we-want-with-your-content-forever)

[esophagus]

According to the Consumerist article it hasn't always been there. They added the part saying they keep your data even after you close your account. That's the issue.

An evil plan doesn't need to be announced. Would you agree to such a contract in real life all because an "evil plan" wasn't announced? Of course not. When you put something on Facebook you're giving your rights away to that content. FOREVER.


http://consumerist.com/5150175/facebooks-new-terms-of-service-we-can-do-anything-we-want-with-your-content-forever (http://consumerist.com/5150175/facebooks-new-terms-of-service-we-can-do-anything-we-want-with-your-content-forever)No. You aren't. You are just also giving Facebook the rights to continue using them. You upload a picture that also has your friends in it then it will still show up as a photo of them. You send them a message the message won't be deleted.

And yes, if someone had the power to do something bad but didn't appear to be doing anything bad in real life I would agree.

Edit: And again, the consumerist article also says that it is limited to your privacy settings.

[masherscf]

It is limited to your privacy settings. Unless your cell phone number was set as viewable to the whole world there is no problem. Even then, I don't think that is the kind of thing Facebook is trying to do with this.

It really doesn't matter what Facebook's intentions are today. The words in the TOC are legitimate language and they have a life and meaning independent of Facebook's intentions. If the wording of the document has a scope that is larger than the intentions of the company, that is a problem. Facebook claims they just want to share your content with your friends today. But, tomorrow they could be sharing the files with their content partners. Facebook has a responsibility to write their TOC to exactly match their intent and explicitly limit their own rights with your material.

At the same time Facebook seems to be disabling applications that allow you to share photograhs through third parties. You wonder why people get teh conspiracy bug.

[skyz]

for some time social networks have thrived on popularity backed by millions in VC capital (added up over all the social networks the investment is in billions)

those investors want something more tangible than 'cool' by association so the pressure is on for PROFIT

ad revenues are not sufficient and the social networks could not keep their numbers by subscription

so what do they have ? they have an immense amount of data and a good amount of media (all which actually belongs to the members)

if you think they are not going to use it your are incredibly naive

even though you own the copyrights to your own media (from the moment it is set in tangible form) it costs big $ to sue for infringement

i predict there will be some class action lawsuits

you cannot make a rule or enforce an agreement that violates an existing law

facebook's TOS even with your agreement cannot deny you your copyrights and included in those rights is something known as 'moral rights' which means you have a right to limit the context in which your work is used

[phatlip]

No. You aren't. You are just also giving Facebook the rights to continue using them. You upload a picture that also has your friends in it then it will still show up as a photo of them. You send them a message the message won't be deleted.

You're attempting to state their intentions which you already agreed was unknown (though you did say you DON'T think they'll do anything bad). You can't have it both ways. The only thing we truly know is what they CAN do under the new TOS. The fact that they can do what was already discussed is the issue here. Whether or not you think they'll actually do what everyone is concerned about is a different story. It's the fact that they CAN do these things if they wanted. Thats what I don't like.


And yes, if someone had the power to do something bad but didn't appear to be doing anything bad in real life I would agree.

You're very likely to get ripped off one of these days then. Everyone lies. You shouldn't blindly trust people because they "don't seem bad".


Edit: And again, the consumerist article also says that it is limited to your privacy settings.

Not debating that. The phone number thing I mentioned earlier was an idea I was just throwing around.

[phatlip]

It really doesn't matter what Facebook's intentions are today. The words in the TOC are legitimate language and they have a life and meaning independent of Facebook's intentions. If the wording of the document has a scope that is larger than the intentions of the company, that is a problem. Facebook claims they just want to share your content with your friends today. But, tomorrow they could be sharing the files with their content partners. Facebook has a responsibility to write their TOC to exactly match their intent and explicitly limit their own rights with your material.

At the same time Facebook seems to be disabling applications that allow you to share photograhs through third parties. You wonder why people get teh conspiracy bug.

Thats the issue I have. If they need this in the TOS for the reasons you just described they should change the language to make sure it meets that specific need. Not have the scope of this clause include so so many other things. Just like in programming, limit the scope as much as possible! ;)

(nerd)

[esophagus]

It really doesn't matter what Facebook's intentions are today. The words in the TOC are legitimate language and they have a life and meaning independent of Facebook's intentions. If the wording of the document has a scope that is larger than the intentions of the company, that is a problem. Facebook claims they just want to share your content with your friends today. But, tomorrow they could be sharing the files with their content partners. Facebook has a responsibility to write their TOC to exactly match their intent and explicitly limit their own rights with your material.

At the same time Facebook seems to be disabling applications that allow you to share photograhs through third parties. You wonder why people get teh conspiracy bug.They did limit their rights. They added the clause that states they can only use them with people you have stated can see them in your privacy settings. The only way they could really do any harm is if they rewrote the ToS again which is a silly reason to be frightened or upset.

(Re: Phatlip, my argument has changed a little (not a lot) because I've since read more about this all and no longer understand it. I was speaking earlier about the Facebook ToS before they added this stuff, which people seemed frightened about already.)

[phatlip]

UPDATE

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.