After a blog highlighted revisions to Facebook's terms of service hinting that the site keeps deleted users' content and can use it at will, a debate heated up on the Web. Here's what Facebook had to say.
Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.
Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.
CNET News' Caroline McCarthy is a downtown Manhattanite who believes that, despite popular opinion, the Web can actually help your social life. She's happily addicted to fun social-media tools from Twitter to Yelp to Facebook, sends an inordinate number of text messages, and has a tendency to waste time at the office reading restaurant blogs. Here, she explores all facets of the Web's gregarious side, as well as the unique tech culture in her home city of New York. (Don't call it Silicon Alley.)
Add this feed to your online news reader
Aside from my life being archived on yet another server as well as the TOS changes, I am also deeply disturbed that many older apps are now being bought by "SpeedDate" which no matter how many times I have deleted the newly bought app that now tries to advertise match-making to me/consumers, it still retains my email address and spams me. I have deleted the application FIVE TIMES as is swallows up old apps! Having been in the Direct Marketing industry for several years now, and watched the evolution of social media, I am so burnt out, never login, and am changing my profession to auto mechanic! Seriously!!
Oh, and did I mention my disdain for SpeedDate?! (BTW I have no association nor have I ever worked for them. I just hate their shady emails!)
I went to Facebook because I didn't like the juvenile aspects of MySpace. Well, I guess there is nowhere you can go. Remember the good old days when people used this thing called "Email" to talk online?! Or better yet, the old BBS's of the late 80's and early 90's? I really miss those days about now.
I have been contacted by several people and facebook gladly forwards these request for friendship to my personal mail id which I had removed. This gave me a reason to believe that their database does not purge the deleted records and only a facebook admin or the company can remove the data, which they will not.
Then again when you want to delete a facebook account, you cannot because they do not allow you to do so. The only option you have is "deactivate". This directly means facebook is going to retain the data in their database. They may say that you may wish to comeback that is why they have the date. I call that horse-****. If I want to delete then why would I want to come back. Ever heard someone trying to recover data they want to securely delete. What facebook should do is ask the user if they want to completely remove their personal data. They must be explicit that the postings on other user accounts will not go away (which is ok) but all images, personal info etc. will be purge once the use confirms deletion.
It is time someone took facebook to court for breach of privacy.
What should really happen when a user deletes their account is they should be offered an option:
A. Delete and hold - remove my account for 6 months and if I don't come back in that time, delete permanently, nothing saved.
B. Delete Permantely, Immediately
Of course you have archived copies of things, but those are understood and since the user is closing their account and not returning they forfeit the rights to those things.
Now, there should be away to remove all traces of a persons, posts, images, etc as they are generally tagged when someone uploads something into the system. If not, you need to strangle your programming team as they've basically screwed you.
I'd be asking a lawyer to ask a court to demand that such a contingency be in place so that when user A decides he wants to vanish from facebook, every email, every photo, every video, etc. just disappeared and was filled in by something else.
But that's just me.
Michael Murdock, CEO
DocMurdock.com
Which means, at any given moment, Zuckerberg could simply remove that line from the policy and start doing whatever he wants with it - and if Facebook can't turn a profit, I wouldn't expect anything less from them. This is the man who stole the entire concept for Facebook from ConnectU - what would stop him from a quick snatch-and-grab of his users content?
And I read through the TOS several times, but I can't seem to find anywhere within it where the Privacy Policy is held to be a legally binding document that takes precedent over their TOS. I find many places where they've claim that in "fluff" talk, on blogs and such, but within the TOS, I can't find anywhere that says privacy settings will be respected in any way. Am I supposed to expect that when the chips go down they aren't going to fall back on their legal safety net?
And to everyone's who frantically deleting photos and content - don't bother, they're keeping it anyway. Might as well just boycott Facebook until they come around - and with the Facebook TOS group at 18,000 members after only a few hours, that's probably going to happen sooner than later.
But what you don't understand is those clowns just revisited the TOS at the request of the boss and did what he told them to do. What's so hard to understand about that? Now he has to tell them they didn't use enough legal talk to get it by everyone last time, go do it again and this time bury it real deep and use the best legal talk in their books.
In contract I have sign they all remain the right change it when they want, I doubt their is a contract in that exist that does not have that term in it.
Most of the people I know are deleting their accounts. I haven't decided on mine yet.
So... that picture you took of your darling little girl that you posted to your page may then become blown up and used on the sides of buses, buildings, TV ads, or whatever to promote Facebook... and their business partners. No financial compensation is required for the commercial use of your content in such a case as it is for promotional purposes.
It's a sneaky thing to do, but it is by no means uncommon either.
These were/are extremely sensitive issues to people, like me, who create art and have the terms of service changed without any notice that affects our constitutionally-protected, inherent copyrights.
Considering "Damage already done" and wishing to preserve the comments friends have written about my own artwork, which I display on my Facebook account, I have chosen to LEAVE my content there -- since they already HAVE copies of my work.
But future postings of my art will be purposely marred with huge copyright symbols.
The VIew Gals and Oprah! Will take you all DOWN!.
Local news at 11, they all piled on.. FINALLY, it's only been 15 years since AOL got grilled for doing the same thing.
Good thing about Depressions, they knock the hell out of far the far swung hubris that unregulated times before promotes.
c3
Facebook where the criminals come to hangout. They will sell your photos in a heartbeat or sell your mother's soul, if it means profits for them. Just try and use the lawyer's statment in a real courtroom, then watch the Judge laugh at you! Berny Mack got some stock to buy.
- by techgeekdude February 17, 2009 11:26 AM PST
- Nice PR response from Zuckerberg...
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (42 Comments)If anything, the change in policy shows that Facebook may finally be devising a business model at its users' expense. Remember, nothing is ever really free, and the loose legalese put out by Facebook gives it enough leeway to do whatever it wants with your information. People may not think it's a big deal, but trust me, when you're private information gets leaked out a few years down the road, it will be too late.