MySpace ... the fine print -

[La Rocque]

This revised user agreement quietly went into effect:
"MySpace has a nonexclusive, fully paid and a royalty-free worldwide license to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit and distribute any content uploaded to the site".
Lots of verbs but it means if You put Your material on MySpace, it can be used by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp(Owner)
News Corp. now has the power to licence Your music, art for whatever(movies,advertisements) without paying You or asking for Your permission -

 

[6 Stringed Fingers]

It's the same with DeviantArt, or any other online art-community.

Yet some of the talented artists still post their work on the sites of this kind. Simply because, in exchange for some of the less serious your art works, you get free advertisement among that community. And the reputation you established on that site will certainly bring you more costumers/contracts for more profitable future works which don't have to be posted in those communities.

 

[Nt3N]

I quote qhat 6SF said

 

[VultureCulture]

actually the icq user agreement has a similar paragraph - everything you message through the icq protocol can be published without your consent. sadly most people don't give a shit and continue to use such software / services, although there would be dozens of other similar competitors without such restrictions.

 

[rahvin]

I guess the main issue here is that your average MySpace user assumes personal details, pictures and posts which require logging in and/or are "friends only" cannot be easily dug up by random e-stalkers. The possibility that they might one day be published or sold in some sort of creepy "best of" by MySpace, is certainly a little disturbing. Mind you, it is perfectly legal, but we know not many will read the user agreement so thoroughly. Although I imagine attention-whoring reaches its highest peak amongst MySpace users.

 

[VultureCulture]

i dont' think myspace would ever consider something like that, because then it would be in everyone's face what licence they actually agreed to. but every band, or artist in general, could be sued for releasing material on a cd, a catalogue, whatever, if it has been previously posted on myspace / icq. of course that doesn't make sense in most of the cases, but imagine a band became very popular over time - a service like that could just wait until there's enough money to be made, and bring up the copyright issue.

 

[6 Stringed Fingers]

Demos can be distributed via Myspace, there won't be a copyright issue later if you don't re-issue that demo for profit. (re-recordings, however, may de treated differently and thus spared from the agreement) Just don't post work that are potentially profitable and personal details on there.

 

[Taliesin]

I think it's just a safety measure for them, in case someone does a documentary or something and someone's site is shown or something. I dont think this would really hold up in any court.

 

[fireangel]

although there would be dozens of other similar competitors without such restrictions.

can you please give examples of those?

 

[VultureCulture]

as for instant messaging, you could always use a gadu-gadu or jabber client to get around the icq protocol, but the main problem is: if your contacts remain on icq at large, you are forced to use that protocol. you still could at least change the client, though that won't help you much with these legal issues. i for one use miranda, it can handle several protocols at once.

further info: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_Messaging

i don't know much about blogging sites, least of all of their end-user agreement, so you'd have to do some research on your own here... but skimming through the agreement of blogger.com (google-affiliated) for instance hasn't revealed any such paragraph yet. (correct me if i'm wrong though)

 

[fireangel]

VC: thank you, I didn´t know about that, will read into it

And I meant communication tools like Icq, hadn´t checked their laws in a while.

For blogs, I do always check their agreements anyhow, I have one at myspace, but I knew already from the start that there you need to be careful and it should be more a fun-tool than something to upload all kind of creative output. But of course it´s a twisted issue for bands, security/copyright vs. popularity.

I plan to get a registration at blogger.com, too, and then I will check their agreement aswell, so I know I have to do research on that I really just asked for alternatives to icq.

Probably it´s still the best to get own homepages, and not such which are parked at a provider, but independently, b/c there you have more freedom to post and protect your work.

Edit: hm, but what´s then with links from the blogs to own homepages? Let´s say a band uses myspace only for promotion and links then to media of their "real" homepage. Would that also be captured by myspace?

 

[VultureCulture]

is far as i know, it only concerns material you post on their site - so if you add a hyperlink to your real site, that should be ok. otherwise google would own the internet (well, it does, sort of).

 

[plintus]

what is myspace?

 

[Blitzkrieg Pajo]

Which idiot gives a shit if someone is allowed to release your icq messages? I mean, you don't talk about world conspiracies or about murdering your neighbour on ICQ, do you? And please... who in the hell would use your icq messages for some purpose? e.g. to make fun of you... c'mon...
This myspace thing is something different yet...

 

[Malaclypse]

the problem, with all privacy matters, is not that "they" would use/release your personal info - the problem is that they could. it may sound paranoid, but apart from the actual message, you could get insight on a lot of other variables in a person's life through cached messenger logs. for example, if / where he works, how long he stays there, wether he has internet access at work, how his connection speed is at home, and so on... and whoopedie, you see a DSL broadband ad on top of your icq client. or streaming video ads, if you already have DSL.
that's one reason why i wouldn't take part in programmes like "payback", where all "they" do is excessive data mining while giving you 3% off on their products. you are right, your own personal data is drowned out in the mass of others, but still i wouldn't give away such info. maybe payback is a special case since it's a consortium of dozens of different companies in different branches.
so yeah, i am one of those idiots who gives a shit if his communication data is published. i reckon you would have nothing against the state reading your mail, or tapping your phone?

 

[rahvin]

how do you know this

Similar agreements to treat private information of people who signed a contract or checked a box saying "Yes, you are entitled to do whatever you want with it" have always - to my knowledge - passed the test in courts of law. Of course, it is possible that this specific agreement is in violation of some law or other, but the general idea is that your "informed" consent allows a third party to do as they please.

has the legality of the user agreement been trialed in a court of law, much less every court of law in the world ("worldwide license" my god damn ass)?

Obviously impossible to put it under the judgement of every court of law in the world, I agree. Still, I think contracts are presumed valid until proven otherwise, so the assumption here is that once you agreed you're pretty much screwed until you successfully sue and win in your country of origin. This is also not very likely to happen for some courts of law in the world, which is probably what these user agreements are counting on.

 

[La Rocque]

I started this thread because of what could happen when a group's music is on MySpace. I don't think personal data has any meaning here, but who knows?
Many well known music groups removed all their music from MySpace when this went into effect.
btw News Corp would rip anyone apart if they are taken to court over this.
They have billions of dollars and many, many lawyers
A personal note I've only been on MySpace 3x in my life to check out DT, KC's group and a friend asked me to check out HerSpace

 

[hyena]

there has been a heated debate in the States about myspace and the right to privacy. some students were planning an act of violence at school and they were discovered by a teacher reading their myspace pages; they were punished and the violence was avoided. unbelievably, there was a general outrage in some circles: according to one of the arguments myspace is used by teenagers more or less like a personal diary, and supervising adults should not even think about looking at it. moreover, and more subtly, teachers should have no right to punish students for stuff that doesn't happen in school; if drug use is forbidden on school grounds and the teacher finds a picture of a student smoking marijuana on myspace (this has happened), there is no ground whatsoever for punishment or enrollment in a rehab behavior at school if the picture wasn't taken on school premises. to me, all of this sounds completely idiotic: people who use myspace and don't protect their contents should know that it can be viewed by anyone. apparently, however, the feeling in parts of america differs from this.

 

[rahvin]

@hyena: In the first example you provided, MySpace has nothing to do with either the finding out or the punishing, so I would say it's not related to the issue of its current or past agreement. On that, I certainly agree with you that the students should be punished anyway, but so should the teachers if they have violated a general rule (not a school rule) and didn't find the incriminating pages by happenstance or simple curiosity or while performing their duty as teachers and/or school caretakers. Still, I suppose any school could just say right out that all the logs coming from the computers inside the building are theirs to browse as they please, so I'm sure it's a moot point.

The second point seems more dubious to me. An extension of school regulations could (should?) certainly encompass punishment or rehab for known substance abusers, but any activity that cannot conceivably have repercussions on a person's behavior at school is probably best left out of the teachers' business.

 

[Taliesin]

I do think it's kinda stupid to smoke weed, or to drink just to get drunk, but I dont think the school has any right to punish students for things that have nothing to do with school at all, even if they're illegal. If he wants to press charges, ok, he's doing it on the base of the law and smoking marihuana is simply illegal, but the school itself has no right to take the place of judge and law.
In the case of the massacre, it's clear that it was the teacher's responsibility, there's no argument.

I think such behaviour would kick down doors, too. If teachers can snoop through myspace and comparable blog or photolog sites and punish students for what they find, it's only gonna encourage students to find the same for their teachers and there's not gonna come any good from this, so let's just stop right here.