Facebook backs down on privacy terms
Facing a federal complaint from a leading privacy advocacy organization and a revolt of tens of thousands of its users, Facebook on Tuesday night backed down from what many have seen as an onerous privacy policy.
Facebook informed all its users that it has, temporarily at least, reverted its terms of service to the previous version.
(Credit: Screenshot by CNET Networks)The policy had seemed to grant Facebook perpetual rights to users' uploaded content, and the threatened complaint from the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) had demanded, essentially, that the social-networking service return to its previous terms.
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg wrote in a blog post late Tuesday that the company had decided to do just that:
Many of us at Facebook spent most of today discussing how best to move forward. One approach would have been to quickly amend the new terms with new language to clarify our positions further. Another approach was simply to revert to our old terms while we begin working on our next version. As we thought through this, we reached out to respected organizations to get their input.Going forward, we've decided to take a new approach towards developing our terms. We concluded that returning to our previous terms was the right thing for now. As I said yesterday, we think that a lot of the language in our terms is overly formal and protective so we don't plan to leave it there for long.
Zuckerberg also said that the company would be adopting a new set of terms that would more carefully take users' rights into consideration:
More than 175 million people use Facebook. If it were a country, it would be the sixth most populated country in the world. Our terms aren't just a document that protect our rights; it's the governing document for how the service is used by everyone across the world. Given its importance, we need to make sure the terms reflect the principles and values of the people using the service.Our next version will be a substantial revision from where we are now. It will reflect the principles I described yesterday around how people share and control their information, and it will be written clearly in language everyone can understand. Since this will be the governing document that we'll all live by, Facebook users will have a lot of input in crafting these terms.
The move came after Facebook had, earlier in the day, polled its users as to whether it should revert to its previous terms. And in his blog, Zuckerberg said that the company would be asking users to get involved in crafting the next set of terms.
"If you'd like to get involved in crafting our new terms," Zuckerberg wrote, "you can start posting your questions, comments and requests in the group we've created--Facebook Bill of Rights and Responsibilities. I'm looking forward to reading your input."
Certainly, we'll have more on this as it develops.
But in the meantime, as blogger Leo Laporte put it on Twitter this evening, "Put down the pitchforks and call off the rabble."
Daniel Terdiman is a staff writer at CNET News covering games, Net culture, and everything in between. E-mail Daniel. 
We create a "snail trail" when we plug into communities online, that snail trail becomes substrate that interconnects with other users and discussion threads.
It's just not reasonable to expect that you can rip that out, creating virtual potholes in the communal space.
Also, why do we begrudge Facebook as nefarious for wanting to monetize these snail trails when we happily accept Google monetizing our traversals, web pages, images and the like? It?s just silly, in my opinion.
Check out:
Why Facebook?s Terms of Service Change is Much Ado About Nothing.
(http://bit.ly/xxE4d)
For more fodder on this one.
Mark
As with many pursuits, once the law gets involved, it gets messy and the groove is gone.
Thus, rather than go forward to an even more unclear version of the TOS, they reverted back to the previous while they work on a better revision. Same thing software companies will do if they release a horrible release, they will yank it until it is fixed. (Ok, maybe not all software companies, but the responsible ones do).
That being said, same thing I posted on Facebook. If you don't want someone to see something, don't post it on the net. Just normal common sense. If you don't want to be perceived as an idiot. Don't act like an idiot where other people can perceive it.
- by jfalsken February 18, 2009 6:26 PM PST
- Does people who do not feel those should be concerned over improper use or exploiting and the selling of your information. More than likely are some of people who steal images and other information from other users. There is a group of professionals who use the site to promote there work and count heavily on the social network to gain exposure for their art. At times, Artist sell their work by allowing Facebook to use freely without consent or permission is a violation to copyright laws and it takes money away from people who earn a living selling their art. Who is going to buy the art if they can get it for free on Facebook?
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by alexg88 February 19, 2009 9:13 AM PST
- "Many use These social sites to sell their work, promote themselves to gain further work by allowing for timely contact in their business." Many? I'm sorry, but an actual business owner is not going to use Facebook as their primary form of advertising. If I saw an ad for a photography business that had a link to their Facebook, I would be turned away, because it's just not professional. Although, I must admit, if the picture is posted on the internet at all, there's a way of getting it. An actual business is going to pay for a website that would look decent and allow the customer to buy from it.
- Like this
-
(14 Comments)This is improper policy to take when dealing with your lively hood and your sweat that goes into your work. Many use These social sites to sell their work, promote themselves to gain further work by allowing for timely contact in their business. To think, Facebook and others own your work without permission or consent and places themselves above copyright law is criminal. Work stolen can never be recovered or resold and decreases the value of an artist's hard work. Not everyone uses Social sites to post their latest drunken adventure, some see it as a tool for business new and old.
Posting quality work and it is these images Social site sell for profit. Your drunken images are all blurry and are worth nothing to anyone, but just your drunken friends to laugh at you with. Unless you are someone famous then count the images will be sold to the tabloids for a lot more money then what your next drunken experience will cost. All with full rights to sell and resell without your knowledge, permission or consent and no legal means to recover damages.
The junk e-mail or spam mail comes from these social sites selling off your information to all who wants it, leaving you with no recourse to stop it. What happens when criminals gain access to your life all your files, posts, images, data., you in turn lose your life! Then they go after your friends life, when they have taken it all away from you. They will even take control over all your accounts. Under the policy of the social networks you do not have legally a leg to stand on, in the end it will cost you more than money it will cost you your life or life's work!
I decided to drop all accounts at the social networks and it will cost me exposure and other's enjoyment seeing my work, because it cost me to much to give it all away for free. Unlike you, I have something of value in my life and I am unwilling to give it all away. I take theft seriously and this policy is a criminal act and I can't support Criminals, maybe you can!
Facebook has never sold my e-mail to other websites, and I don't know anyone who has gotten spam linked to Facebook either. Anyone who is willing to throw their LIFE onto a social networking site probably shouldn't have an account. Facebook is not a criminal, and I will continue using it as the social networking site it was made for.