From: D. Glenn Arthur Jr.
IANAL, but doesn't this basically translate, despite the scary
legalese, to: "If you post a picture, you're authorizing us
to _display_ that picture, subject to your privacy settings,
until you delete the picture (unless you've given somebody
else permission to display it and they haven't deleted their
copy yet)" ??
That doesn't sound scary; it sounds like how photo-sharing
works. The only part that gives me pause is the "transferable,
sub-licensable" bit, which makes it sound as though they can
sell other companies permission to display your pics off-site,
and I don't know why they'd need that for the site to work as
expected, but it still sounds like that goes away when you
remove the picture from FaceBook. Maybe that part is for
third-party apps that work with the site?
I'd like to see it constrained a little more than it is, but
I don't find it startling. But, as I said, IANAL (and may be
insufficiently paranoid in today's IP climate).
The sub-license stuff sounds like it's intended to cover all the
possible scenarios where someone copies a photo or links to or embeds
part of a Facebook page in a blog or webpage.
Someone sat down with a lawyer and described all the different ways
Facebook might be accessed and the lawyer came up with language you have
to agree to saying that's OK with you before you can become a member.
It's not so they can sell the photos, but so you can't sue Facebook if
some other Facebook user takes the photos from Facebook.
I expect there's also something in their Terms of Service where you are
required to agree not to take other members photos (or other IP) without
their permission.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
