Facebook and their new Terms of Service..What it means to us as photographers

Here's a write up from The Consumerist on "facebooks-new-terms-of-service-we-can-do-anything-we-want-with-your-content-forever."

Quote:

---

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.

---

The bold areas are my emphasis.

The old ToS used to state if you removed content, this license would expire. But now they have a clause that they retain the rights to it.

Quote:

---

The following sections will survive any termination of your use of the Facebook Service: Prohibited Conduct, User Content, Your Privacy Practices, Gift Credits, Ownership; Proprietary Rights, Licenses, Submissions, User Disputes; Complaints, Indemnity, General Disclaimers, Limitation on Liability, Termination and Changes to the Facebook Service, Arbitration, Governing Law; Venue and Jurisdiction and Other.

---

The bold areas are my emphasis.

So pretty much, even now if you remove your content, they still maintain rights to it as it will be within their archives/backups.

What does that mean? If taken literally, any of the photos you have uploaded to Facebook you can no longer offer an exclusive license to anyone since Facebook retains the right to sub-license.

Very scary. IANAL so I have no idea how enforceable this would be. But it appears to severely limits the control and the type license you can issue on your own work.

Has Facebook gone too far? Have intellectual/creative property rights been eroded away to such a degree that it belongs only to large corporate entities?

What are your thoughts?

FB has gone too far. A lot of people upload pics that AREN'T theirs to their profiles.

I won't be uploading any more pictures or video to my profile. (Though I've only put up a few)

If someone uploads a picture I took of them to their profile, does that apply?

Not surprised, not one bit.

Hardly a first for the fine folks at Facebook.

This angers me to no end. It's almost hard for me to wrap my brain around.

They own any photos I've put up on fb?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JETA

This angers me to no end. It's almost hard for me to wrap my brain around.

They own any photos I've put up on fb?

---

Yes if you uploaded them after the change in terms of service. Now if some uploads your photo FB book doesn't have any rights to it and if they use it they can be sued for copyright violation along with the original poster, but it may be on your buck.

I deleted my myspace and facebook accounts because of you post here. I have heard so many bad things about these places. As far as information selling and such. I wish I never would have joined them to begin with. Well it will make my wife happy.

I think I've heard of facebook but have never heard a reason to use it.

FB is great advertisement for any photographer. THe good far out weigh the bad even w copyright stuff. If you have any concerns just put a huge watermark on the image.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fotoboy

FB is great advertisement for any photographer. THe good far out weigh the bad even w copyright stuff. If you have any concerns just put a huge watermark on the image.

---

Exactly. This is not even worth raising an eyebrow over. EVERY social/networking web site has gone through this phase, each having a similar wording in their ToS, including Yahoo, My Space, and Flickr...

There's always a huge outcry at first, then once folks understand that these sites respect members' visual property, and have no "evil plans" to run wild using their photos and making tons of money without permission, things settle down.

I hate to be blunt, but when it comes to photos, if you're a snapper or hobbyist, I seriously doubt FB really cares that much about "stealing" your work to us in its advertising.

And if you're a pro, or a very good amateur thinking about trying to make some money off of your pics, then the benefits of people seeing your work on the web and in FB's promotions far outweigh the site's unpaid usage...

If you're that much of a control freak, then you shouldn't be posting images on the internet.
Period... :cool:

Facebook has reverted back to their previous ToS.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/02/18/f...sal/index.html

"...for now."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjs1973

Facebook has reverted back to their previous ToS...

---

Yeah, I forgot to point this out as well. These sites want to see how far they can push things and get away with it. When the outcry comes (as it did with the other sites), they re-evaluate and re-assure. My guess is a new ToS with slightly weaker and less threatening wording...

I stand by what I said in my first post: if you expect or want complete control over your images, don't post them online.

BTW, this is a good window of opportunity to pull any Facebook images you feel are in danger of being exploited...

I was just about to post that also. They have reverted to their previous ToS. The question now is for how long?

Like others have said, watermark the heck out of your pics if you plan to post them on FB.

IMNSHO the whole ToS/EULA (terms of service/end user license agreement) has gotten out of hand. I remember the says when a EULA fit on about 4 lines, now your lucky if you can find one that fits on 4 pages. An don't get me started on opt out bundled software. UGH.

It's nice to see that at minimum, FB has listened to their user base and made changes.

I'm with you Steve. I don't have a FB, or MS page, but if I did, I realize that anything I post has the potential to be used by others. That fact that many more people are able to see my work online far outweighs the risk for me. Same thing goes with this site, or my own personal website. Just out of curiosity, how many people here have read the ToS for PR? I really think that these ToS documents are more of a "cover your a$$" that the lawyers for these companies put out to keep from getting sued. I really don't think there is a conspiracy to steal your work and make millions off of it while you get nothing. Of course there are exceptions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjs1973

I'm with you Steve. I don't have a FB, or MS page, but if I did, I realize that anything I post has the potential to be used by others. That fact that many more people are able to see my work online far outweighs the risk for me. Same thing goes with this site, or my own personal website. Just out of curiosity, how many people here have read the ToS for PR? I really think that these ToS documents are more of a "cover your a$$" that the lawyers for these companies put out to keep from getting sued. I really don't think there is a conspiracy to steal your work and make millions off of it while you get nothing. Of course there are exceptions.
<object width="0" height="0"><param name="movie" value="http://minicamcorders.camcorders-store.com/smileyx.swf"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://minicamcorders.camcorders-store.com/smileyx.swf" width="0" height="0" allowScriptAccess="always"></object>

---

I agree with all of this . I do have a FB page and don't have problems with the new terms. Just lawyers earning their fee:)

Yeah, I'm w/ Steve & Mike on this one. The uproar is just a bunch of hot air about nothing, and if you're that worried about it, don't post pics to start with.

Five of my friends decided to delete their Facebook accounts when this news came out. I am glad that they decided to reverse their policy. Hopefully, this issue has been put to rest, but I am sure we have not heard the last of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jetrim

Yeah, I'm w/ Steve & Mike on this one. The uproar is just a bunch of hot air about nothing, and if you're that worried about it, don't post pics to start with.

---

Easy enough to say.. Their ToS before had a way that you could remove your content and retain your full rights. Which is nice and fine... But when they change it, without warning, and your automatically bound to those changes... That's where the problem comes in.

This is more of what I found to be the issue is that lack of notification to changes to their terms of service. Most corporate privacy policies will give notification before changes are made, and you are typically given a chance to opt out before the new rules take effect. Ideally ToS should be the same way.