EFF Launches TOS Tracker 65
stoolpigeon writes with this quote from the EFF:
"'Terms of Service' policies on websites define how Internet businesses interact with you and use your personal information. But most web users don't read these policies — or understand that the terms are constantly changing. To track these ever-evolving documents, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is launching TOSBack: a 'terms of service' tracker for Facebook, Google, eBay, and other major websites. ... The issue of terms-of-service changes — and how and why they are made — was highlighted earlier this year when Facebook modified its terms of use. Facebook users worried that the change gave the company the right to use members' content indefinitely. After a user revolt, Facebook announced that it would restore the former terms while it worked through the concerns users had raised."
Diff (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't install this. (Score:3, Insightful)
IANAL, but as far as I understand, if you need a special add-on to ensure that you see their updates, their updates mean nothing. If you must see and click through a TOS to use the service, it is binding. If you need to take action to see the TOS, it is not. So don't install this, don't view their updates, and save a copy of the TOS that does apply to you.
Re:Don't install this. (Score:1, Insightful)
Symptom of the TV-Web (Score:5, Insightful)
ToS and the control they provide to the likes of Flickr are a symptom of the provider-consumer split. In the early days of the internet, people understood that you don't need a central service to host your web page, that you do not need to give a third party rights to your photos if you just want to share them with your friends. New users don't know that anymore. When they want to do something with the web, they look around for some service which does it for them, in exchange for their content. It's so easy, who cares that you have to sign away your rights?
Re:Symptom of the TV-Web (Score:5, Insightful)
in the early days of the internet the people who used it all had online storage space. Most people today do not. They have whatever their ISP gives them and it's usually not much and comes with it's own issues.
OTOH if you just wanted to share with friends email still works fine. Flickr et all are about sharing with a community greater than your own small circle of friends.... like minded strangers who could become friends if only they knew you existed.
How 'bout something more useful? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, I guess it's great that they're tracking Google and Facebook and YouTube.
But how about they track the terms of service on some major credit card companies, as well?
Or health insurance companies?
Or car insurance.
You know... something fucking useful?
Re:How 'bout something more useful? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry to be replying to myself, but I mean just look at this list:
* Amazon
* Apple
* Automattic
* Blizzard
* Craigslist
* Data.gov
* DoubleClick
* EBay
* Electronic Frontier Foundation
* Facebook
* Flickr
* GoDaddy
* Google
* MySpace
* Organizing For America
* Recovery.gov
* Twitter
* Whitehouse.gov
* Yahoo!
* YouTube
How often does fucking Twitter's change in Terms of Service screw up your life? And real nice that you're monitoring yourselves as well, because I'm sure we were all really worried about that.
But how about some of these bastards:
* BlueCross BlueShield
* Time Warner
* AIG
* Bank of America
* Verizon
I hate to look a gift-horse in the mouth, but come on. You're pissing away a perfect opportunity to actually be relevant.
Re:Facebook revolts (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, except that - you're wrong. This revolt /did/ work, because Facebook /did/ change their TOS in response.
What are you complaining about?
Re:Symptom of the TV-Web (Score:3, Insightful)
Hell yeah - take email. Email by nature is decentralized. Nobody has a monopoly on email and everybody can have their choice of email providers. But when we start using myspace and facebook messages more than email, we have a problem - myspace cant send messages to facebook and vice versa. So if you want to talk with your friends, you need to join that network. The owners of that network can then have total control of how messages are sent.
I think we could solve this problem by creating ways for social networks to communicate to eachother. Some kind of standard. That way if you didn't like facebook TOS, you could join another network, but still keep in touch with your friends. That will never happen though, since it causes facebook to loose money. Another solution would be to build some new alternate decentralized social networking standard from the ground up, and hope that it gets popular enough to topple the current oligopoly.
Bottom line: Companies have no clue how to thrive in a decentralized world where users have control, so like always, they try to make internet work like centralized old media. Reminds me of a quote from Marshall Mcluhan: We look at the present through a rear-view mirror. We march backwards into the future.
Re:Diff (Score:1, Insightful)
That would get lobbied right into the ground before the initial draft cooled coming out of the laser printer.
There's no way that big business will allow themselves to be forced to explain to their consumers just exactly what new ways they've come up with to screw them over in the name of profits and shareholder value.