The world will no longer end thanks to Instagram reverting back to its old Terms of Use.
Instagram said on Thursday that it has reverted back to its previous Terms of Use language due to all the feedback the company received after the changes it made earlier this week. The company claimed that it failed to communicate its intentions clearly, and is focused on setting things right once again.
On Monday the popular photo sharing service updated its Terms of Use with language that would go into effect on January 16. The update stated that "you agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata), and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you."
Say what? That's right, and it doesn't stop there. "If you are under the age of eighteen (18), or under any other applicable age of majority, you represent that at least one of your parents or legal guardians has also agreed to this provision (and the use of your name, likeness, username, and/or photos (along with any associated metadata)) on your behalf," the new Terms stated.
Naturally the statement about making money off an Instagram member's username, likeness, and photos without compensation caused quite a poop storm. The backlash was immediate, and Instagram followed up on Tuesday claiming that it had no intentions of selling anyone's photos, and had no plans to retain ownership.
"I’m writing this today to let you know we’re listening and to commit to you that we will be doing more to answer your questions, fix any mistakes, and eliminate the confusion," stated co-founder Kevin Systrom. "As we review your feedback and stories in the press, we’re going to modify specific parts of the terms to make it more clear what will happen with your photos."
Later in an update on Thursday, he clarified that Instagram users own their photos, not the social platform. It clearly states this in the Rights portion of Instagram's Terms of Use, saying that "Instagram does not claim ownership of any Content that you post on or through the Service. Instead, you hereby grant to Instagram a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide license to use the Content that you post on or through the Service."
Now the controversial section of Instagram's Terms of Use has been reverted back to its original state. "Going forward, rather than obtain permission from you to introduce possible advertising products we have not yet developed, we are going to take the time to complete our plans, and then come back to our users and explain how we would like for our advertising business to work," Systrom said on Thursday.
"I’m proud that Instagram has a community that feels so strongly about a product we all love. I’m even more proud that you feel empowered to be vocal and approach us with constructive feedback to help us build a better product," he added. "Thank you for your feedback."
Of course they're going to BS their way out of this by saying "that it failed to communicate its intentions clearly".
Screwed up company should be shot down.
The end of this sentence had me laughing at my desk.
"you agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata), and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you."
and this?
"Instagram does not claim ownership of any Content that you post on or through the Service. Instead, you hereby grant to Instagram a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide license to use the Content that you post on or through the Service."
It's just a reword
First of all they are now owned by Facebook, so:
1. They think they're Facebook, ie. get as much information about people as possible and try to use people's personal info/pics to make money even if its to sell it to very shady 3rd-party companies.
2. Next they'd think they are Google who is index, analyzes more information about people outside of Facebook. Ie. tracking people locations on their Android phones, analyzing people's emails, etc, etc.
3. And a far distant we could consider Apple...
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9m9hcEnYeM
Oh the contrary, Youtube, which came pre-installed with previous iOS versions, NEVER had any advertisements whatsoever. It wasn't until Google released there piss-poor youtube app that they started jacking people with Ads.
best thing you can do is pull all photos and info now and or patent everything you have on the site and eliminate your accounts with facebook/instagram now while you still can.
Because Youtube was costing Google money. Youtube wouldn't exist if it wasn't for that move.
Nothing.
Surely this could not be a legal act. While it is unlikely to happen with widely known people or characters it is bound to eventually happen to lesser knowns. Another issue is pictures of others that you did take but the person never consented to being put on Instagram or possibly even pictured at all.
The entire practice seems to not only be morally wrong but a issue that tip toes on a minefield of legal issues.
I mean, since when a photo sharing site/app is so relevant?