Randi Zuckerberg shared the above photo of her family—including Facebook Czar-in-Chief Mark Zuckerberg—on Facebook. Then it got out into the world, and Randi got all upset about her privacy. Oh, boo hoo, Randi!….
The Instagram legal team was in full spin mode after users threatened to dump the service over what many believed to be an egregious privacy policy that basically asserted they, not you, own the copyright to all uploaded photos. A surprise change in Instagram’s terms of service added this little tidbit that had the serfs marching on the castle.
“To help us deliver interesting paid or sponsored content or promotions, you agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your user name, 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,”
In order to stem the impending tide of users jumping ship, the legal spin doctors released this hastily worded change.
“A business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos … and/or any other actions you take … without any compensation to you.”
They must think we are all a bunch of dummies, because as far as we can tell, this is exactly the same thing. Whether they offer to sell, or a buyer offers to buy, a sale puts the user’s privacy and pocketbook at a disadvantage.
Check out this fine article for more details.
Instagram sought to calm a growing furor among its more than 7 million users by saying it would clarify a new, controversial privacy policy.
If Facebook’s acquisition of Instagram (and the resulting privacy-invading terms of service change) has you put off from using the service, there are more than a handful of alternatives out there. Here’s a look at other apps you can use to get the same results from a still-independent developer….
copyright (Photo credit: A. Diez Herrero)
Bloggers often use images to spice up a post. Many times those images were created by someone else and unless specifically in the public domain, those images are usually covered by a copyright. Obtaining a copyright for an image requires no formal process, marking or paperwork. The copyright is granted automatically. If you are using an image you didn’t create, assume it’s covered by a copyright.
While copyrights give the holder significant control over how an image is used, it is by no means absolute. The fair use clause creates an exception that may sometimes seem very unfair to the copyright holder. Weighted heavily in favor of the public interest, fair use allows for limited use of a copyrighted work so long as it doesn’t interfere with the copyright holder’s ability to use and disseminate the work as he or she see’s fit. Most bloggers are aware that using snippets of text in a post as a reference, or illustration of an idea, is usually within the limits of fair use. It’s the use of complete images that cause confusion.
Since images generally only make sense when displayed in their entirety, the sharing of complete images online is generally allowed under the fair use doctrine. This special case of fair use is what often infuriates the copyright holders; to them, it doesn’t seem very fair at all. But like snippets of text, the use of complete images is not without restrictions.
Read the referenced post below for an excellent detailed explanation of fair use and how it applies to copyrighted online images.
Copyright Fair Use and How it Works for Online Images | Social …
While the general rule is that you can’t use a copyrighted work without express authorization from the owner, there is one significant legal construct that allows millions of people every day to see and share images online.
