Audrey mentioned something about this at dinner tonight. And it just so happened to pop up in my Reader. I find it interesting how little control we have over our own stuff sometimes.
Assuming this is true, I think it's scary how easily we're ready to give up our rights. That goes for more than just Facebook. I suppose some of it is just a matter of not reading terms or service or agreements or what have you. As Katie mentioned, it's also probably just part of what we decide we "need." We "need" cell phones. We "need" Facebook. We "need" social networking, and ways to stay in constant contact.
I'm open to argument about this, but it creeps me out more and adds to my resistance against Facebook. Of course, I'm more a part of it than I'd like to admit or more than I even realize. It's pretty interesting if you need to kill 10 minutes. Check it out here.
6 comments:
i read through the link you posted comparing the terms of use between social networks; really disturbing and interesting. according to facebook, any link you provide is also owned by facebook, regardless if the owner of the linked content gave permission. do you realize how many corporations, musicians, artists, and organizations have links and even pages?? does that mean facebook is claiming ownership for logos, copy, graphics, music of already copywrite material?
i heard on the radio last night facebook used to have a feature that when you bought anything online, while signed in to facebook, it would broadcast your purchases to your friends. (mikey bought these socks from old navy.) people were outraged and they finally removed the feature. maybe they'll rethink this one as well. sinister.
That's pretty messed up. Ya know, I'm not anti-Facebook because I don't want to stay in touch with people. That's not really the point. (And yes, this from the guy who actually looked into Twitter a little bit... Hypocrite much?)
The 100, 200, 300+ friends that people have is crazy. You can't tell me that those 326 people need to know you bought shoes. Or see the pictures from that party. And to blatantly state that they OWN your stuff... Ridiculous.
Now, I did come across an article on CNN today that said they reversed the policy. I'm not totally convinced. "Gee, we own your stuff... Oh, you're mad now? Okay, we won't own it anymore... I guess..."
I have "friends" who pull stuff like that. I don't trust them much either.
Mike, be honest. You're anti-Facebook because a lot of people like it. You can argue with me all you want, but you know it's true. You're the kid that likes a band because no one knows about them...until that band has a hit, and then you don't like them anymore. It's just like how you turned your back on Nickelback (who suck, by the way...you never should have liked them in the first place. Except when they weren't well-known - then they were good).
Kidding aside, you'll find any excuse to dislike Facebook. This is just today's reason.
Here's the entire CNN report, with a statement from Facebook's privacy guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91WMKR4iVHU
(This post should not be taken as support of Facebook's temporary TOS changes, by the way).
Hahaha, I'm sure that plays into it. I am sort of anti-bandwagon.
Although I'm not sure I wholly agree with the music thing. (Was I really that big a fan of Nickelback...?)
The Nickelback thing was a joke. ;)
Hahaha, sometimes it's hard to get the ball-busting effect through the interwebs.
Post a Comment