— FEATURED —
Black Code: how spies, cops and crims are making cyberspace unfit for human habitation
We Can Fix it! - a graphic novel time travel memoir
The technology that links taxonomy and Star Trek
— COMICS —
Tom the Dancing Bug
TOM THE DANCING BUG: Super-Fun-Pak Comix, featuring Caveman Robot, and MORE!
Brain Rot: The Statue
Real Stuff: Fatal Fellatio
— GUATEMALA SPECIAL SERIES —
Guatemala awaits Constitutional Court rulings, defense continues legal challenges to genocide trial
Victoria Sanford: "It’s Too Soon to Declare Victory in Guatemalan Genocide"
Xeni on PBS NewsHour, in Guatemala: Ríos Montt genocide verdict and aftermath
— RECENTLY —
Odd Duck: great picture book about eccentricity and ducks
Scatter, Adapt, and Remember: How Humans Will Survive a Mass Extinction
Illustrator William Stout's Legends of the Blues - exclusive excerpt
Hackers prepare for first "national holiday" in their honor
Review: Disunion, the VR guillotine simulator
Mousetronaut: kids' picture book about mouse in space, written by a Shuttle pilot
Review: Pebble e-paper watch
Nothing Can Possibly Go Wrong: YA graphic novel about robots, romance and school elections
Old School Dungeons & Dragons: Wizards of the Coast’s Problem Child
Jello Biafra and The Guantanamo School Of Medicine's "White People and the Damage Done"
— FOLLOW US —
Boing Boing is on Twitter and Facebook. Subscribe to our RSS feed or daily email.
— POLICIES —
Except where indicated, Boing Boing is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution
— FONTS —
Xeni Jardin at 1:12 pm Tue, Dec 18, 2012
Actually, guy at The Verge, they are most definitely selling your photos. Usage rights are still being granted for money. Not being able to modify is just part of the deal. Instagram is essentially a big stock photography business. The only difference (for advertisers) is they have to put people’s implied-endorsement-by-picture in a separate box.
The condescending swipe at people who find a problem with being used to sell stuff without their permission:
It’s no wonder Instagram’s new terms have triggered a passionate, emotional reaction in people who don’t understand them — the same thing happens to Facebook users who are constantly falling for privacy hoaxes.
is lame. Maybe this response is happening because a personal photo is such an easy to understand concept–versus “likes” and “friends”–that people who haven’t put up a stink about Facebook are finally realizing how the money’s made.
The writer should’ve asked advertisers if they think they’re buying the photos. Bet there’s a purchase order or two that says they are.
So, the way I read it, they can’t simply sell your photos. But they can take your drunk photos, add on “remember that great drunk feeling? Live it again with Budweiser,” and send it back to you and all your friends and coworkers and prospective employers. And they can take your photos of your kids, add on “Wouldn’t it be terrible if something happened? Life insurance from Liberty Mutual”, and send it to your parents.
Hey, you clicked “Agree.”
Old terms: ”…grant to Instagram a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, worldwide, limited license…”
New terms: ”…grant to Instagram a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide license…”
I don’t see anything that limits to whom the company can sub-license images or for what purposes. The new terms seem to go beyond the rights Instagram needs to run the service.
That depends on the meaning of “the service.”
The sad thing is that this country has real freaking problems that are essentially being ignored: police state, unlawful wars, indefinite detainment, war profiting, big industry control, etc etc; meanwhile, a very slight and very misunderstood change in instagram’s tos suddenly moves people to action.
Where does “people still use the n-word” fit into that hierarchy?