Worst Terms of Uses (Facebook amongst them)

[CharlieChomper]

I saw this article posted on another site and since I'm currently weeding through my backlog of articles to post, I thought I'd, at least, post this one for you to read over. It involves EULA's (licensing terms/Terms of Use) and some of the worst amongst them out there.

Some of the highlights include:

-Facebook claiming ownership to any and all images you may choose to upload and then having the right to sell those images as "stock" images and profiting from the sale of them.

-Youtube being able to retain any videos you may choose to delete at some point (and thereby claiming ownership of them upon your uploading them) and keeping them forever if that's their wish.

And related to this:

-Google claiming any ownership of any content you may create with their new Chrome browser (which is currently experiencing some other, more bug and security-related problems at the moment).

[silverlining]

Thanks for the info!

On principal EULAs like this annoy me, but at the same time I always go "I can't be bothered to care" when it comes to stuff like Facebook or YouTube, because I actually want to be a member of the sites and I wouldn't upload stuff there that I'd be ashamed of. It's too bad they're sneaky but..well, it just doesn't seem worth not using the sites.

[Felicity]

That just shows me, that I should read the fine print sometimes!

I have a Facebook account myself, but not too many pics are up there. They are really sneaky, but what can one do when you enjoy the use of the website.

Felicity

[lianne]

They're just all trying to make profit of our things, huh?

[CharlieChomper]

The sad reality is that among the reasons as to why companies (or even sometimes projects) implement EULAs like this isn't just because they can (especially following the passing of the DMCA into law...), but because they know that most of the time, the majority of people often click on "I accept" or "OK" without bothering to read the terms of use/EULAs of whatever site or software package it is and they think or feel they can literally get away with whatever they want to since either people will remain unaware of whatever it was in the terms that may be objectionable as they never bothered to read them to begin with.

Needless to say, this has also led to a number of abuses--but, again, companies play upon ignorance on the part of the users or else even apathy in order to get away with whatever they want--no matter how it ultimately affects the users or how many privacy-related issues arise.

There was an incident not too long ago involving Flickr of where someone had posted an image that they later regretted posting since they decided it was very inappropriate and were concerned about the message it might send to younger people who may have come across it. Someone else came across it and made a tshirt based upon that image and began selling it. The person who had posted the photo then tried to sue Flickr and the person who made the tshirt only for the courts to rule that legally anything that was posted there became the property of Flickr/Yahoo and was under a type of license which allowed the tshirt person to be free and clear to profit off of the sale of the other person's work (nor were required to so much as provide credit) and there wasn't anything which the person who posted the image could really do about it--all of which was covered by the EULA for Flickr, which the person who posted the image never bothered to read as it came out.

I know I'm probably and sadly in the minority in saying so, but I actually do take the time to read over every licensing agreement that passes by me--it doesn't matter if it's for an open source project, an update for a commercial package, a website or something that's work-related or for personal use. If I have a problem with something in the terms, I decline them and that's the end of it.

Among the reasons as to why I actually have not done anything with my Yuku page is actually because of this. When Kickstart bought out what had been EZboard (and thereby Yuku), the licensing terms were changed and became more restrictive to a point of where legally, Kickstart owns whatever content, images, layouts, etc. you upload and use on your site or member page. For that reason alone, my page will remain as it is without any customization made to it.

On a related note, for purchased software, if you decline the licensing terms, by law in almost every country on the planet, you do have the right to return that software and should receive a full refund (in some US states, people have successfully sued shops and chains which attempted to charge repackaging fees in such situations).

Unfortunately, until or unless more people either take the time to read over the licenses or become more vocal in objecting to the questionable terms or privacy rights violations or put those objections above using whatever software or site has them and refuse to remain silent to this or remain apathetic, companies are going to continue to go this route. So far, there have been lawsuits filed against some companies in relation to these issues (and many of them have succeeded). However, realistically and without sounding like an ad for either the EFF or the FSF, the more vocal people become and aware of this they become and sound off on it, the easier it becomes to do something about getting rid of these sorts of licenses and protecting what are ultimately your rights.

[andavri]

My old computer science teacher used to tell us that if you don't read the EULA agreement you're selling your soul to Bill Gates. (Or whomever is CEO of the company in question) It was something of a joke, but I think there is a point in it. I can't say I always read all of the fine print in some sections, but I scan over everything and read everything about usage and copyright. If what's going up on the site isn't going to be under my control, I don't agree. There's no site that I can't live without so badly that I'm gonna lose control over my stuff.

I ran into that with trying to show the machinima video I made, I'd rather not share it than put it up somewhere I can't keep control over it. I think people should care, but I also know that a lot of people don't have law degrees either and half the time it's all so legalese'd that people wouldn't understand it even if they went through it.

It's like some of the paperwork I've been having to sign recently. "Sign your name here" and I read the release, so the people point out that I'm supposed to sign at the highlighted part, and I'm like "Yeah, I know. But I want to know what I'm signing." *shakes head*
~Steph

[Theachen7]

I remember we had a long lecture about safety online at school last year. Facebook were amogst the sites that came up. I didn't have facebook at the time, but there were a lot of people who became slightly nervous when they heard that once they uploaded something it couldn't be deleted.

[Kiri]

And this is why I don't upload anything to Facebook or any of these other sites.

I think all EULA's are pretty bad. Most of them are too long to read, and too much legalese to hide from users what they're agreeing to.

Kiri

[silverlining]

Sept 6, 2008 13:11:43 GMT Theachen7 said:

I remember we had a long lecture about safety online at school last year. Facebook were amogst the sites that came up. I didn't have facebook at the time, but there were a lot of people who became slightly nervous when they heard that once they uploaded something it couldn't be deleted.

Actually it can be deleted. It says in their terms that once we take something off of the site, their liscense to use it expires but they reserve the right to keep an archived copy. (It could just be me but it feels like that's something they'd do to keep from getting sued if a duplicate should remain on their server after a server move or somesuch). I can kinda understand part of their terms, I mean they've gotta be able to move stuff from a server to another and suchlike without having to ask each member individually for the right to do so. It's really only the bit about that they can profit from our stuff that bugs me. That's why I don't put up any writing there. Granted, I'd still own it too if I put it up there, but meh. Just to be safe, I don't.

[CharlieChomper]

Legally speaking, once you agree to that EULA with Facebook, you are basically signing over any ownership rights you may have had on things.

As to the archiving bit, sys admins never need permission from individuals before they move a file from one server to another or even to a make a backup of it (in fact, most users would not have any reason to even be aware it may have even happened). They can and will do it regardless (in other words, it's not something that an agreement would be necessary for).

It's only under certain circumstances such as a site or database, etc. which may be drawing upon too many system resources that may be bringing a server to its knees as it were and "throttling" it that the system administrator may opt to move it (although, they may be just as likely to disable it instead if that's the situation) and where it may affect someone's domain or a "path" in some way or they may opt to charge a user for having moved it (especially if it's to a higher-capacity server that may be much more likely to handle the load and therefore cost more) or for any "excess" or just for the sys admin's time or something may be in violation of the terms of use that the user may be contacted about the matter.

Websites and just corporations don't make backups or keep copies of things (even in their archives) to prevent lawsuits so much as a precaution and means of protection in a "'what if' disaster scenario"-type of situation as despite all the built-in redundancies that may exist as well as other precautions, there's still always that chance of something going awry. Most companies make mention of the fact more as a courtesy than anything else.

In terms of the legalese aspects of EULAs, there's currently a movement trying to simplify things in that regard and not too long ago, the US courts as well as the EU had ruled or commented that they needed to be somehow simplified because they were needlessly complicated and more often than not in some situations of where users did read them, they also sometimes could not understand them. There have also been a couple of techie-related advocacy groups involved in the issue and trying to expose or take companies to court to protect users either with respect to their rights or privacy issues that have been involved.

Admittedly, part of me is saddened by both the sometime-sense of apathy that some people exhibit on this issue as well as by how far companies are trying to push the proverbial envelope and how it sometimes seems like very few people are really saying or doing anything about stopping it.

[silverlining]

Not to sound like I'm causing debate or defending their *** EULA, but the terms do say that everyone still has the rights to do whatever they want with their stuff as well as that we're not waving any "intellectual property" of it. I reread it just yesterday. The problem is that they own it too XD. Anyways, I don't wanna cause an argument so I'mma stay out of this thread from now on.

EDITED to add: There's sevral facebook groups about the terms if anyone's interested, the biggest one is this www.new.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=5606823556&sid=2d123879223e94843de60a2e55517819&refurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.new.facebook.com%2Fs.php%3Fq%3Dterms%26init%3Ds%253Agroup%26k%3D200000010%26n%3D-1%26sid%3D2d123879223e94843de60a2e55517819