Sudden cialis india pain in all the joints can be a symptom of buy cheapest erythromycin alternative several conditions, including infections, gout, ME/CFS, and some autoimmune conditions. cheap zofran in uk While a diet generally high in fructose links with high order cheap glucophage online triglycerides, honey appears to reduce them in moderate amounts, although buy cheapest prozac online not all studies have found this. People at risk for buy cheap robaxin online cardiac arrest should see a doctor and ask about options buy free zyprexa prescription for adopting a heart-healthy lifestyle and managing any underlying risk buy generic prozac cost professional factors. The early onset of the condition, which can lead gel us to a person living with the condition for longer, may cialis no rx required lead to greater fluctuations over time. A person should wash accutane online sale their hands with warm water afterward since citric acid from order cialis no rx lemons can cause skin irritation. In contrast, people who simply want.

It’s always sobering to read those “I agree” documents you have to click on to register for a Web service. Almost no one ever does.

Facebook’s has always given it blanket rights to do what it wishes with the stuff you post on your Facebook page, including

to (a) use, copy, publish, stream, store, retain, publicly perform or display, transmit, scan, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works and distribute (through multiple tiers), any User Content you (i) Post on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof subject only to your privacy settings or (ii) enable a user to Post, including by offering a Share Link on your website and (b) to use your name, likeness and image for any purpose, including commercial or advertising, each of (a) and (b) on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof.

There’s more, about how Facebook can transfer those rights, and so on. What’s new today is that the agreement used to say that you could take back ownership of the data if you closed your account. No more. Now they own it forever, even if you decide you want to take it back.

So if you are, say, a college student foolish enough to post a stupid picture of yourself drunk or half-naked, and then you think better of it, and in fact think better of the whole Facebook idea and close your account, and in ten years you are running for Congress, Facebook will be perfectly within its rights to scan its records of dead accounts and sell the rights to that photo to the Associated Press, or People Magazine.

Would they do that? No way to be sure. Rationally we might choose to think that would be a stupid thing to do from a business standpoint, as it would discourage others from using the site. But such decisions are not always made rationally. And why would they be changing their policy now if they don’t anticipate doing exactly this in the future?

Added 8:30 PM 2/16: Mark Zuckerberg has blogged about this. He defends Facebook’s “philosophy” and what it would do “in reality” (as opposed, I guess, to what it has the legal right to do):

In reality, we wouldn’t share your information in a way you wouldn’t want.

Indeed, in reality, Facebook would probably realize what a losing long-term business proposition it would be to sell your drunken photos of yourself to the media.

Which is why, when Facebook did “in reality” launch Beacon and shared information in a way many Facebook users did NOT want, it quickly did an about-face. There seems to be push-back assembling again, though in the case of this change, no one can right now detect any difference.

Is there really no way to draft the legal language so it matches the reality of Facebook’s presumably good intentions?

This entry was posted on Monday, February 16th, 2009 at 7:55 pm and is filed under Owning bits—copyright, Privacy, Social computing, What is information?. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.