Instagram Terms of Service Controversy Prompts Class Action Suit

Instagram was quick to backpedal last week in response to user outrage after its term of service agreement was altered to be interpreted in a way that would allow the photo-sharing service to sell user posted pictures.

The terms of service controversy irked California Instagram user Lucy Funes so much that she filed a lawsuit in San Francisco federal court against the service. According to Finkelstein & Krinsk, the law firm representing Funes, customers can refuse Instagram's terms of service, at the cost of losing their profile and the rights to the photos they've posted to the site. "In short, Instagram declares that 'possession is nine-tenths of the law and if you don't like it, you can't stop us,'" states the complainant.

Reuters pointed out that the new terms of service allows bars users from suing the company. However, the new terms of service isn't set to kick in until next month, hence why Funes is able to file the suit now.

Facebook has released the following statement in response to the litigation: "We believe this complaint is without merit and we will fight it vigorously."



Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Create a new thread in the Streaming Video & TVs forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • wildkitten
    Here is the problem, when people use these "free" products, the companies aren't acting like charities, they have to find ways to make money or there is no product. Now I agree with the people who don't want their photos used in ways they don't like, but instead of getting mad and suing, here's another way of not worrying about it...DON'T USE THE SERVICE.

    This is why I don't use things like Instagram, Facebook and such. If I want to use a service, I will look for one where I have to pay to use it because those services typically allow the user to decide how things are done. As the old saying goes, you get what you pay for. But this is just another example of entitlement mindset. These people want to use Instagram, they want to use it for free and decide what the rules are.
  • joneb
    You are wrong, people pay for I-Tunes music and Kindle books but they can lose their paid for content to those companies too. Whats wrong are the big companies are now bullies and tyrants and I believe working outside the law often as no matter what there are in their terms and contracts there are laws of the land that are above and beyond them even when there is a virtual landscape as such. The only goods I will buy in a virtual setting are games that will be played out eventually and never music or movies or books that can be taken off me again even though I paid for them.
  • azgard
    With the massive amount of TOS POS shoved down consumer's throats it won't be able to be ignored much longer and your going to see severe restriction's on the abilities for companies to use blanket term's that essentially free them of any and all liability while forcing the customer to assume any and all liability and at the same time forfeiting legal recourse.