Beware Facebook's New Terms of Service

Alternative approaches to e-abuse

Alternative approaches to e-abuse

We're all becoming somewhat more concerned about access and use of information we put on the web. It appears that everyone from Facebook to the NSA are taking an interest in what my cat did today.

Rather than a radical response, like leaving the web-world altogether, I currently have a 'buyer beware, seller beware of my attorney' attitude. [This of course could change with whatever revelations show up in the NYTimes tomorrow. :rolleyes: ] No matter what Terms of Use Conditions entities like Facebook throw out there, it certainly seems to me that if their behavior causes me damage, I can sue their b**ts off. Granted the lawsuit cost hurdle would often shield someone like Facebook from threat, its still a legal option.
 
What we are talking about is the old concept of "a free lunch," discussed here; http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/tanstaafl.html
Click to expand...

That does rather depend on how you define "free".

For most Europeans, health care, education and other things that Americans expect to pay for are "free", as in the British NHS which is "free at the point of use". Of course, it's paid for out of taxation. Interestingly, the public sector is the largest employer in the UK (as it is in most European countries) and thus public sector employees are the largest group of tax payers. So the tax money that supports the NHS comes, in large degree, from NHS employees...

It's enough to make you cross-eyed, if you think about it too much.

:D
 
I've looked through this thread, still don't understand something - has anyone seen their profile picture in an ad, or one of their posted photographs in an ad? How would that even work?

Or when I see an advertisement for "Hot Singles in Your Area!", are those all facebook profile shots?

Don't get me wrong, I am no defender of Facebook, ever since someone explained to me what 'Farmville' was. (Actually, they needed to explain it twice, as I could not understand why anyone would voluntarily do something so pointless and boring. )

Randy
 
Mackinaw said:
On a related note, it's estimated that as of September, 2013, Facebook has 1.15 billion users. Most folks don't read the fine print or, if they do, they don't really care.

Jim B.
Click to expand...
If 1/3 to 1/2 of theose 1.15 billion being used by Facebook were to voice their displeasure with FB's flagrantly self-serving, arrogant and greedy "everything you post now belongs to us" policy, perhaps FB would get the message.

Hmmm - how to send a message? Here's an idea: How about if EVERY photographer with images on FB removes them - and then replaces them with a gallery of photographs of s**t.

Dog s**t. Cat s**t. Pig s**t. Polar bear s**t. Owl s**t. Ungulate s**t. Bear s**t. Horse s**t. Bird s**t. Wombat s**t. Cape Buffalo s**t. Cow s**t. Whale s**t. Black bear s**t. Penguin s**t. Human s**t. Vulture s**t. Wild boar s**t. Turkey s**t - but most of all, BULL S**T, which is exactly what FB's arrogant, exploitative and abusive user agreement is.

Each photographer should strive to post, say, 100 images of s**t on his/her FB page.

Think that might send a message?? :D
 
It is really a very personal decision about controlling presentation of one's own images.
Click to expand...

I reject this characterization wholly as self serving, wishful thinking on your part. Images are by law the property of those who create them, irregardless of how their 'presentation' is 'controlled'.
 
ok, so FB is evil.
Too bad, I am just starting using it, and I must say it has some advantages, like gathering people from all kind of backgrounds, and creating a contact between them.
Since I re-opened my FB account, It allowed me to show my pictures to a much broader crowd than RFF can offer (most o fmy friends are on FB, but none is on RFF for example)
So, instead of just bashing the whole thing and offering to cancel accounts or remove all pictures from there: would there be a way to counter FB (disgusting) policy?
I don't put my portrait there for the simple reason I don't want my students to spot me there, so this one is taken care of.
what about pictures?: maybe using low res jpg's only (I scan my negs at 1000 dpi) could do the trick? or 99% of the trick?
who is gonna use a 1.5 MPixel image for commercial use anyway?
Or ....more complicated, I could store my images on my gmail drive and post only links to them?

Any other idea to constructively deal with this issue?
 
Sejanus.Aelianus said:
That does rather depend on how you define "free".

For most Europeans, health care, education and other things that Americans expect to pay for are "free", as in the British NHS which is "free at the point of use". Of course, it's paid for out of taxation. Interestingly, the public sector is the largest employer in the UK (as it is in most European countries) and thus public sector employees are the largest group of tax payers. So the tax money that supports the NHS comes, in large degree, from NHS employees...

It's enough to make you cross-eyed, if you think about it too much.

:D
Click to expand...
In France it is subsidized, not free, with different percentages of fixed (conventionnee) prices for different conditions: 100% for cancer, 65% for most things, a very low percentage for spa treatments. It's also done on a payment-and-reimbursement scheme, so people have an idea that medical treatment is quite expensive.

Cheers,

R.
 
Thanks Roger for the clear explanation, I sometimes forget you are not in the UK. Much like the German system? And deep in deficit?
Click to expand...
What does "deficit" actually mean in this context? As a French Minister of Railways once said, "Does a primary school make a profit?"

I know very little about the German system, except that apparently it is administered to some extent by religious organizations.

Cheers,

R.
 
Always read your terms of service, even in the physical world.

Back in 2004, Disneyland solicited photos that they eventually used in giant photomosaics in the Disneyland park as part of their 50th anniversary celebration. The terms gave Disneyland ownership not only of the photos you submitted, but every photo you ever had taken or might take for the rest of your life. The response was underwhelming, so they assigned multiple employees to walk the parks, snapping pictures of people to fill out the library.
 
Or post a photo like this:bang:


My Faceook Post in protest to the new TOS par Peter Arbib, on ipernity

I posted this on FB along with it:
FB's new TOS allows them use any photo you upload for commercial purposes, and sell or rent your photo for their profit,
with NO COMPENSATION to you as the "Copyright" holder. They "Think" the new TOS will "VOID" your Copyright, RIGHTS!!!
 If you agree with this, Please "LIKE" then share this with your friends!​
 
No one has yet to provide an example of what will actually go down with their new terms of service. Is a project manager at a marketing firm really going to use a photo pulled off Facebook without a release? And then use it in an ad on Facebook?

Or is this more about the fact that your photos, including profile photo, inevitably appear alongside ads, and they don't want you to put up a hissy fit because you are "associated" with some commercial activity you don't like? This sounds more like an attempt by FB to shield itself from petulant internet users - like 1+ billion of them.

Randy
 
Good point..
I have seen my photos in a corner ad to "Promote" for $10 a month...
Could this be part of it?
 
DNG said:
Good point..
I have seen my photos in a corner ad to "Promote" for $10 a month...
Could this be part of it?
Click to expand...

But Facebook is soliciting YOU to pay for your post to be 'promoted', correct? Only you are seeing that, and you have control over whether or not your post is raised in priority, by whatever algorithm their search engine uses.

I don't really use Facebook, so I am guessing at how this works.

Randy
 
DNG said:
Good point..
I have seen my photos in a corner ad to "Promote" for $10 a month...
Could this be part of it?
Click to expand...

zauhar said:
But Facebook is soliciting YOU to pay for your post to be 'promoted', correct? Only you are seeing that, and you have control over whether or not your post is raised in priority, by whatever algorithm their search engine uses.

I don't really use Facebook, so I am guessing at how this works.

Randy
Click to expand...

Yes, you are correct.... and, I have no idea if any photo has been used for profit w/o my release or consent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top