On Jul 6, 2011, at 1:01 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: > On 11-07-06 3:23 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >> http://photofocus.com/2011/07/06/google-plus-read-the-fine-print-before-you-sign-up/ >> >> Makes the good point about "read the fine print before you sign up, or post >> anything". >> >> The short form is that if you post something to google+, they get to do what >> they want with it, without paying you. >> >> I haven't looked into the google+ photo sharing at any depth yet. I've got >> an account and have poked around a bit. The biggest advantages seem to be >> the user interface for sorting friends into groups (or circles) so that you >> can select who to share with, and that it isn't facebook. >> >> -- >> Larry Colen [email protected] sent from i4est > > To be fair (for a few milliseconds) a large part of that ToS is, of course, > to enable them to store your uploaded images and to enable them to be seen by > whoever you intended to share them with. Clearly they need to be able to > "transmit" the data to accomplish this and "modify" would typically be to > resize them for thumbnails and recompress them like Facebook does now.
And they pretty much say as much. > > However, the lack of a phrase like "we will give up any of these rights when > you remove the content" (like Flickr has) means they are doing the Facebook > thing and are therefore just as useless for a photographer to use in any > professional capacity. And, to be fair, their goal is not to become a professional photography site. Their goal, I assume, is to set up a social networking site that makes money, and/or supports other services that enhances their ability to make money. Of course anything any lawyer writes is going to do the best job that they can to say "we get everything, you keep nothing". Also, there is undoubtably a huge bookkeeping nightmare to keeping track of the source of any images that they might want to use for any other purpose, or that anyone else clips or copies. > > So maybe this will become Facebook 2.0 with all its present limitations and > intellectual property rights and privacy concerns. I don't think so. It does seem that the employees at Google do have some adult supervision, though perhaps someone like Tim may disagree. > > -bmw > > -- > 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. -- Larry Colen [email protected] sent from i4est -- 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.
