If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   Instagram backpedals, gives their version of 'sorry you were offended by what I said': "Our mistake that this language is confusing"   (reuters.com) divider line 23
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

7900 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Dec 2012 at 8:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-18 08:52:16 PM
9 votes:
It has been said time and time again......If you are not paying for it, you are not the customer. You're the product being sold.
2012-12-18 06:52:53 PM
8 votes:
Advertising on Instagram From the start, Instagram was created to become a business. Advertising is one of many ways that Instagram can become a self-sustaining business, but not the only one. Our intention in updating the terms was to communicate that we'd like to experiment with innovative advertising that feels appropriate on Instagram. Instead it was interpreted by many that we were going to sell your photos to others without any compensation. This is not true and it is our mistake that this language is confusing. To be clear: it is not our intention to sell your photos. We are working on updated language in the terms to make sure this is clear.

I wonder why that is? Oh, I know! The words from the user agreement itself!

"To help us deliver interesting paid or sponsored content or promotions, you agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata), and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you.
2012-12-18 07:33:25 PM
5 votes:
Yeah, sorry, I already uninstalled Instagram and won't be looking back.
2012-12-18 11:21:22 PM
2 votes:

gweilo8888: On the other side of the coin, they're bleeding DVD subscribers like there's no tomorrow, and are down to just 8.61 million.)


As popular as it was, the DVD system sucks. I only enjoyed it when I copied the disc, sent it back, and watched later at my leisure. Getting one or two discs and having to watch all of it before you send it back is lame.

Schlepping your ass to the grocery or corner store is a tolerable alternative but I'm back to just stealing everything that's not on streaming.
2012-12-18 09:12:36 PM
2 votes:

Runs_With_Scissors_: I wonder why that is? Oh, I know! The words from the user agreement itself!

"To help us deliver interesting paid or sponsored content or promotions, you agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata), and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you.


That wasn't the bad bit. (Well, it wasn't the worst one.)

The bad bit was this:

"you hereby grant to Instagram a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide license"

Coupled with this:

"You agree that all disputes between you and Instagram ... with regard to your relationship with Instagram, including ... rights of privacy and/or publicity, will be resolved by ... arbitration ... As an alternative, you may bring your claim in your local "small claims" court"

Those bits (the bold areas are the worst bits, the underlined areas are new, plus they dropped the word "limited" from the first phrase) translates into English thusly:

"We can do absolutely anything we like with your images including those showing your likeness and even showing you in your own bedroom if we want, use them anywhere, for any reason, and sell them for any amount we like to absolutely anybody without giving you a single cent, and your only recourse is to huff, stamp your feet, and go to an arbitration system designed to favor its client (the company) or to limit damages to us (small claims court). Pthhhhhbbbbbttttt!"

Those bits are the REAL bad bits. Putting your name next to an ad is child's play compared to that language. If anything, the ad thing and the response to it is a bit of sleight-of-hand misdirection.
2012-12-18 09:04:47 PM
2 votes:
Instagram: "Sorry that we used such vague language."
Translation: "We didn't think anyone ever read this shiat."
2012-12-18 08:26:29 PM
2 votes:
Because God knows all those sepia toned photos of your breakfast were so valuable.
2012-12-19 04:34:00 AM
1 votes:
Every pic you take
Every post you make
Everything you like
All your friends in sight
Facebook's using you

Every smiling friend
You post on Instagram
Won't belong to you
Nothing you can do
Facebook's using you

Oh can't you see
They know you and me
Can match your name to a face, that can be accessed anyplace

And maybe just next year
Whatever shop you near
Cameras ID you
To further market to
Facebook now owns 'you'

Since it came the net is a worse space
If I share I feel like I'll be traced
The buttons and the "like us" pleas disgrace
The thoughtful words that they replaced
I just can't not feel paranoid

You own nothing here
It couldn't be more clear
Instead of getting mean
You feed the machine
The one that's using you

-© 2012 Facebook
via Rosinal McDonald
2012-12-19 12:57:46 AM
1 votes:

sugardave: gweilo8888: Losing one in 29 of ALL of your customers in a single quarter (largely, in a single month) is not a huge exodus?

What do they have to do, lose every single customer in one go, and a few hundred million customers they didn't even have?

You're funny.

That equates to a WHOPPING 3.44% of their customers.


You fail at math. And reading. And... well, everything, really.

It was 3.25%, as I clearly stated earlier. And while you clearly have a huge boner for Reed Hastings, that was a pretty catastropic fail. Losing close to a million customers by their own admission (and quite likely even more, in the real world) in the space of a few weeks is just unbelievably poor management.
2012-12-19 12:55:13 AM
1 votes:

sugardave: gweilo8888: Losing one in 29 of ALL of your customers in a single quarter (largely, in a single month) is not a huge exodus?

What do they have to do, lose every single customer in one go, and a few hundred million customers they didn't even have?

You're funny.

That equates to a WHOPPING 3.44% of their customers.



If you have continual quarters of customer growth and you backtrack and LOSE customers that is a back quarter to Wall Street and will reduce the overall value of your company. Not sure how anyone who knows anything about financial projection/analysis is denying this.
But I may have answered my own question.
2012-12-19 12:41:01 AM
1 votes:
I'd quit, but I never joined in the first place.
2012-12-18 11:28:48 PM
1 votes:

moothemagiccow: gweilo8888: On the other side of the coin, they're bleeding DVD subscribers like there's no tomorrow, and are down to just 8.61 million.)

As popular as it was, the DVD system sucks. I only enjoyed it when I copied the disc, sent it back, and watched later at my leisure. Getting one or two discs and having to watch all of it before you send it back is lame.

Schlepping your ass to the grocery or corner store is a tolerable alternative but I'm back to just stealing everything that's not on streaming.


Not quite as lame as buffering... buffering... buffering... oh, wait, the movie's come back again! Damn, that's blurry. Oh well, I guess it's playing again... Oh. Shiat. It's started buffering. Oh well, I'll come back and watch it later.

*leaves*

*comes back at a less popular hour*

"Netflix is offline for maintenance"
(This is verbatim my typical experience during the ~year or so that I had Netflix streaming, and I have typically had the highest or second-highest tier speed available to me from my cable internet provider, which is far in excess of what is available over DSL, my only other choice for internet -- and I am not in a rural area, either. And yes, Netflix regularly had outages when I was trying to watch movies -- it even happened midway through a movie several times.)

Sorry, as bad an experience as DVD might be, Netflix streaming was far, far worse. And on top of that, the movie selection was utterly appalling compared to DVD, where the selection was its saving grace, and absolutely second to none.
2012-12-18 11:00:02 PM
1 votes:

gweilo8888: CruJones: Netflix uses 30% of the intertubes. That's a lot of tubes. It's possible they can lose revenue, but gain profit. Replacing a less profitable but higher revenue generating product with a cheaper but more profitable one can be frowned upon by Wall Street, regardless of long term outlook. Netflix will be fine.

Fine my ass. They're having to fight to prevent a hostile takeover from the same man who killed Blockbuster.

Those 30% of the intertubes? (Can't be bothered checking the validity of your claimed number; let's pretend it's true.) They're pretty damned expensive. They're weaning customers off a profitable business with a great selection, and putting them onto a business that was only sustainable in the first place because the subscriber numbers were so low when they signed their first round of contracts with movie studios. Each time they renegotiate on a contract expiration, they're having to piss away significantly more money because of all those subscribers they've got now, so the cost of streaming to Netflix is increasing exponentially, yet the selection is far, far worse for customers than what was available to them on DVD.

(I am among the many customers who cancelled Netflix altogether because their Watch Instantly selection was so bad and not remotely worth what I was expected to pay for it, yet they clearly have no interest in their DVD customers any more either. To whit: they aren't bothering to replace their damaged discs, and have actually started sending the same broken discs out over and over even after they're reported broken. I've gotten back the very same disc I reported faulty previously, with the exact same fault in the same place, so I know that to be a fact.)


They don't want the DVD business anymore, they know its the past. Would it help if I told you they are building their own CDN, and cut what they currently spend with Akamai in half? And that they are looking at open source cloud platforms to slice licensing (and Amazon) costs as well. They aren't going anywhere soon. They actually have a pretty good strategic IT plan, which is pretty much their entire business now. Warehouses and shipping departments eliminated. It makes sense.
2012-12-18 10:17:13 PM
1 votes:

twistofsin: gweilo8888: gingerjet: Relevant.  
 
/false outrage is false

Very cute and trite, but more than a few of those outrages have resulted in people defecting en-masse. Have you looked at Netflix's stock lately?

Pssst ...

Disney has recently signed on with Netflix. I think they are going to rebound just fine ..


Netflix uses 30% of the intertubes. That's a lot of tubes. It's possible they can lose revenue, but gain profit. Replacing a less profitable but higher revenue generating product with a cheaper but more profitable one can be frowned upon by Wall Street, regardless of long term outlook. Netflix will be fine.
2012-12-18 10:05:59 PM
1 votes:

gweilo8888: gingerjet: Relevant.  
 
/false outrage is false

Very cute and trite, but more than a few of those outrages have resulted in people defecting en-masse. Have you looked at Netflix's stock lately?


Pssst ...

Disney has recently signed on with Netflix. I think they are going to rebound just fine ..
2012-12-18 09:59:42 PM
1 votes:

1000 Ways to Dye: revrendjim: Yeah, sorry, I already uninstalled Instagram and won't be looking back.

I hope you're not on Facebook, because the Terms & Conditions also allow them to use your public content in any way they see fit.
Same with most sites that allow user-hosted content for free.


And that is why you put no public content on fb
2012-12-18 09:53:03 PM
1 votes:

gingerjet: /false outrage is false


The only thing that I see that really kills off products is that they ride it till it goes in the ground, never adding features and when they do it is a shiatstorm of wacky crap. See Yahoo's purchase of Flickr. Hell there wouldn't even be an instragram if Yahoo kept that property up.
2012-12-18 09:49:01 PM
1 votes:

rocky_howard: gweilo8888: Actually, no. Compare the old TOU side by side with the new one. The verbiage about ads being placed next to content is significantly changed. However, as I said, that's not the real bad bit. The real bad bit is the words "transferable, sub-licensable", plus the fact they contractually prevent users from suing either as a class action or individually.

[d3j5vwomefv46c.cloudfront.net image 600x223]


Um, no. The new terms are SIGNIFICANTLY worse. "Use" already means "modify, delete from, add to, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce, and translate", and "transferable, sub-licensable" plus non-limited means they can not only distribute part or all of your work, but it also means that they can sell it to anybody else to do the very same.

Essentially, the new terms mean they can do *everything* they could under the old terms, but they can now also give your content to anybody else they want to and let the unknown third party do any of those things too.

And as for the second quote, there is a BIG difference between "may place advertising ... on, about, or in conjunction with your content", and "may display your username, likeness, and actions you take ... in conjunction with paid or sponsored content". But yes, as I have repeatedly said, the whole advertising thing is a tiny red herring. The huge deal is the words "transferable, sub-licensable" right to your photos, along with the fact that they do not explicitly state that those rights end when your photos or account are deleted.

I also strongly question the legality of stating that a minor can provide implied consent on behalf of their legal guardian simply by accessing a website. If a minor could provide implied consent of their own guardian, surely that would defeat the purpose of a guardian existing?
2012-12-18 09:18:45 PM
1 votes:

rocky_howard: boyuber: Instagram: "Sorry that we used such vague language."
Translation: "We didn't think anyone ever read this shiat."

And they'd be right since those terms about photo use by advertisers have been on Instagram since at least 1 year if not more. People just freaked out because they did a recent change to the TOU and it was picked up by the blogs and it ran from there. But before that? Nobody had read the damn TOU to begin with...


Actually, no. Compare the old TOU side by side with the new one. The verbiage about ads being placed next to content is significantly changed. However, as I said, that's not the real bad bit. The real bad bit is the words "transferable, sub-licensable", plus the fact they contractually prevent users from suing either as a class action or individually.

Oh, and the fact that they can change the contract at any time without any notice to their users (meaning you have to read it *every* time you visit the site to see if something has been changed), and without any advance warning of an impending change (all they have to do is say "admin reasons" and they are allowed to change it instantly, as many times as they want -- and your having visited the site to see if the contract changed is in itself deemed an acceptance of the changed contract that you've not even seen)... THOSE are the really bad changes.
2012-12-18 08:53:17 PM
1 votes:

1000 Ways to Dye: revrendjim: Yeah, sorry, I already uninstalled Instagram and won't be looking back.

I hope you're not on Facebook, because the Terms & Conditions also allow them to use your public content in any way they see fit.
Same with most sites that allow user-hosted content for free.


Funny you should mention Facebook....
Guess who now owns Instagram.....Why Facebook, of course.
2012-12-18 08:33:35 PM
1 votes:
Instagram: Where pornstars go to post photos of their pets.
2012-12-18 08:26:48 PM
1 votes:
I'm sure that this was just one big misunderstanding. You should definitely come back to Instagram. Especially you, 18 year old girls, who take naughty pictures of yourselves, and then send them to people.


/ we promise not to look at them or sell them
2012-12-18 08:26:13 PM
1 votes:

revrendjim: Yeah, sorry, I already uninstalled Instagram and won't be looking back.


I hope you're not on Facebook, because the Terms & Conditions also allow them to use your public content in any way they see fit.
Same with most sites that allow user-hosted content for free.
 
Displayed 23 of 23 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report