WeTransfer Backtracks on Terms Suggesting User Files Could Train AI Models After Backlash

WeTransfer has reversed controversial terms of service changes after users protested language suggesting uploaded files could be used to "improve machine learning models."

The file-sharing service, popular among creative professionals and used by 80 million users across 190 countries, clarified that user content had never been used to train AI models and removed all references to machine learning from its updated terms. Creative users including voice actors, filmmakers, and journalists had threatened to cancel subscriptions over the changes.

Can they prove it?

[evanh]

Saying it hasn't happen is easy to say when no proof is required.
The fact that they had clearly decided that selling the data was an okay move suggests they'd already gone ahead without any consent.

Re:

[gweihir]

And that is why you do not use a scummy service like WeTransfer...

backtrack

[zlives]

now they will do it and just not tell the user.
you can sue them later and lose.

Anybody else getting sick and tired

[Chris Mattern]

of these cutesy-poo "We" and "I" names?

I initially missed the lack of a space between "We" and "Transfer", which made for an interesting parsing train wreck.

genuine question... but can't a company just chang

[Jayhawk0123]

genuine question... but can't a company:
-copy the data to a data store..
-change their TOS to make it okay for them to sell the user data to a 3rd party for or an internal org that is spun off silently...
-transfer ownership of said storage...
-change TOS again removing the clause...
-3rd party does what it needs to with the data
-all withing a second

TOS doesn't actually require end user agreement for companies to do shit with your data, and few places actually have laws that would forbid this, and even fewer t