Read the terms!

[danrok]

From the Front Page:

After reading this news article at the BBC, I decided to remove some of my photos from Facebook. I don't like Facebook, but I have friends who insist on using it.

Link:
http://www.aoaforums.com/frontpage/content/view/2980/1/

From the BBC article:

To find suitable matching elements, the research duo's algorithm looks through a database of 2.3 million images culled from Flickr.

Those would be 2.3 million images, they paid not a penny for! Cheeky gits!

Comments?

[Gizmo]

Just playing devil's advocate here, but how is that different from what we do? (BTW, I haven't read the article yet...)

[aghastpumpkin]

Ok. Bit off topic - but why don't you like Facebook?

And why should you use it just because your friends do? Isn't that kinda bowing in to peer-pressure?

[danrok]

Originally Posted by gizmo

Just playing devil's advocate here, but how is that different from what we do? (BTW, I haven't read the article yet...)

I'd say that our terms are there just to cover AOA's ass. We don't sub-licence our member's submissions, or sell them on. Also, we're not making billions of dollars, which is what these sites are said to be worth.

My understanding is that Facebook, Flickr and others can, do and will, take your photo, modify it, and generally do whatever with it. The point is, you just don't know what they may do with your stuff, in the future.

Add to this, that if you post a photo gallery and flag it as "for friends only". They can take that photo a put it on their front page, or on a billboard in the street outside your house. This is dodgy, considering that you have flagged it as private. It's not private at all, completely opposite to that.

[aghastpumpkin]

I think the chances of Facebook taking one of my pictures and using it is HIGHLY unlikely.

[danrok]

Originally Posted by aghastpumpkin

Ok. Bit off topic - but why don't you like Facebook?

And why should you use it just because your friends do? Isn't that kinda bowing in to peer-pressure?

I don't like it because it encourages people to give out personal information, under the pretense that only their friends will see it. Even if you are guarded, your friends may still reveal information about you.

As we all know, it is easily hacked.

Underage girls post photos of themselves naked on it, not realising that those photos will be stolen, and float around cyberspace for the rest of their life.

I signed-up to contact a long lost friend, no peer-pressure involved. It is designed so that you can easily find an old friend, but you can't contact them without signing-up, yourself.

[aghastpumpkin]

Originally Posted by danrok

I don't like it because it encourages people to give out personal information, under the pretense that only their friends will see it. Even if you are guarded, your friends may still reveal information about you.

As we all know, it is easily hacked.

Underage girls post photos of themselves naked on it, not realising that those photos will be stolen, and float around cyberspace for the rest of their life.

I signed-up to contact a long lost friend, no peer-pressure involved. It is designed so that you can easily find an old friend, but you can't contact them without signing-up, yourself.

As far as I know, personal information is something you give out voluntarily.
And I've never seen nude/rude pictures on there....as far as I'm aware they aren't allowed.

[danrok]

Originally Posted by aghastpumpkin

As far as I know, personal information is something you give out voluntarily.

The point is, people don't realise when they are giving out information. For example, you post a photo of your pet with its name in the caption. Ever seen the security question for password recovery - What is your pet's name? It's commonly used.

Everyone is prone to letting things slip, falling for scams, etc.

Facebook warn about these things in their blog:
http://developers.facebook.com/news.php?blog=1&story=26

And I've never seen nude/rude pictures on there....as far as I'm aware they aren't allowed.

It is illegal on all sites, yet these photos do exist for sometime before action is taken. You even said your ex-girlfreind has done this.

[cloasters]

I read that the head chingon at Faceboook is a real Boosh fan. Enough said.

[robbie]

Originally Posted by cloasters

I read that the head chingon at Faceboook is a real Boosh fan. Enough said.

Oh geez bud!!! :P

[aghastpumpkin]

Originally Posted by danrok

It is illegal on all sites, yet these photos do exist for sometime before action is taken. You even said your ex-girlfreind has done this.

I really don't appreciate this being brought up.....
I'm not saying it isn't done. But on Facebook I've never personally encountered it nor heard anyone else to do so.
I don't think you can blame Facebook because people choose to reveal their personal details. If I posted on AOA all of my details - would that be AOAs fault? Of course not. It's voluntary.

[danrok]

Originally Posted by aghastpumpkin

I really don't appreciate this being brought up.....

So, don't put it in the public domain in the first place.

[Daniel ~]

Ok lets look at this another way AP.
Let's say 15 years from now you involved in an intense rivalry within a very Public and "prestigious" company. Your opposite forks across $5,000.00 to have a professional search done on you, anything they can find or track down....

Where are they going to look? One of the places they will look is in data bases complied from, you guessed it, Mywhatit'sface and access sold to whom so ever desires such information.

If though some third party or means they know your password here, they could access your past posts. But at lest you know we didn't sell anyone that information, if they have it, they got it elsewhere, that's our pledge.

Danrok has read their pledge and it's very different in intention. Their intention is to make money off you and information about you as well as any picture or image you post....this is there full time intention, this is what they stay up nights figuring out how to do. The flock has been gathered and corralled," now how best to fleece them!"...

When they TELL one what they are up to and you refuse the heed the warning, one only has one self to blame. Danrok further complaint is that they are NOT nearly forth coming enough about their intentions.

[danrok]

Many of us wonder why such websites are valued at such vast dollar value. How can a website which is barely more functional than AOA, be worth 100's of millions if not billions of dollars?

Aside from the advertising revenues, it is these contracts which members enter in to which have serious value. Millions of people have signed over their property to Facebook, Flickr, and others.

I am just highlighting this, because most of us don't read the terms and conditions!

It's good to keep an eye on what they're up to...

[Daniel ~]

Not to mention having been ripped off for the rights to some of your photos.

[danrok]

Originally Posted by Daniel ~

Not to mention having been ripped off for the rights to some of your photos.

With Facebook, the contract expires when you delete a photo.

This seems like a potential flaw. If they have already sub-licenced that image to another party, what then?

[Daniel ~]

Well they expect your team of legal experts to tell you that!
(Every 15 year old should have one!)

[Pitch]

It's a fad, it'll pass.

[danrok]

I agree, and these sites seem to be bought out by companies who have large sums of spare cash, and don't knwo what to spend it on. It's just a one upmanship thing.

If I had exactly $200m dollars, and no other money, there is no way I would buy Facebook with it. Might as well just give it away.