Instagram says it now has the right to sell your photos. Update, December 18 at 2:50 p.m.
PT: Instagram has backed down, as we report in this CNET article posted a few minutes ago. Instagram says it will "remove" the language that caused a user revolt over the last day. Instagram said today that it has the perpetual right to sell users' photographs without payment or notification, a dramatic policy shift that quickly sparked a public outcry. The new intellectual property policy, which takes effect on January 16, comes three months after Facebook completed its acquisition of the popular photo-sharing site. Unless Instagram users delete their accounts before the January deadline, they cannot opt out. Under the new policy, Facebook claims the perpetual right to license all public Instagram photos to companies or any other organization, including for advertising purposes, which would effectively transform the Web site into the world's largest stock photo agency.
Facebook did not respond to repeated queries from CNET this afternoon. Instagram Will Share User Data With Facebook According To Its New Privacy Policy. Instagram has just announced an update to its Terms of Service and Privacy Policy which will go into effect starting January 16. According to the popular photo-sharing service, Instagram has introduced this Privacy Policy update to better collaborate with Facebook, which purchased the app earlier this year. No, Instagram can't sell your photos: what the new terms of service really mean. You agree that a business may pay Instagram to display your photos in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions without any compensation to you.
That sentence was added to Instagram's terms of service yesterday, sparking widespread outrage — the most panicked analysis claims Instagram just gave itself permission to sell everyone's photos at will. Even the least icky hypothetical scenarios being tossed around are completely icky: your parents leave a comment on a photo of your kid, and five minutes later, they're looking at an ad for a new life insurance policy featuring that same intimate photo of their grandchild. Is this really the future of Instagram? Well, in a way. Stop Whining About Your Personal Data on Instagram You Little Whiny Baby. #Instagate: Instagram Claims Right to Display Users' Photos in Ads, Users Protest as Company, Now Owned by Facebook, Changes Terms of Service. <br/><a href=" US News</a> | <a href=" Business News</a> Copy "Dear Instagram, Good-bye old friend ... it isn't me it's you," Brian Simpson wrote on his Facebook wall as he shut down his Instagram account.
It was the first thing he did when he read of Instagram's first big policy change since it was acquired by Facebook in April. Instagram, the popular service for sharing and filtering photos shot on phones, has now released changes to its Terms of Use, which will go into effect on Jan. 16, 2013 for all users.
"Our community has grown a lot since we wrote our original terms of service. It quickly had something of an online rebellion on its hands. So what did they say? National Geographic suspends Instagram account in response to new terms of service. National Geographic has announced that it will stop posting pictures to Instagram. The move comes after the photo-sharing social network introduced a controversial new terms of service agreement that sparked fears it would be able to sell users' uploaded images.
The announcement came via an image posted to Instagram itself, simply reading: @NatGeo is suspending new posts to Instagram. We are very concerned with the direction of the proposed new terms of service and if they remain as presented we may close our account. National Geographic runs a popular Instagram feed with over 640,000 followers, and considering the magazine's long history as a respected outlet for world-class photography, it's not surprising that it would find the current controversy concerning. Instagram: We've heard you that the updates... Instagram ciblé par un recours collectif aux USA. Que serait une polémique sans sa class action ?
Alors que le cofondateur d'Instagram a annoncé en fin de semaine dernière la révocation des nouvelles conditions d'utilisation, celles-ci ayant entraîné une controverse parmi les utilisateurs du service de partage et de retouche de photos, un usager a décidé d'aller en justice pour enclencher un recours collectif contre la plateforme sociale. Déposée devant un tribunal californien, la plainte affirme en particulier que si les internautes qui n'acceptent pas les règles du site peuvent effectivement désactiver leur compte, ils perdent néanmoins les droits sur les photos qu'ils ont préalablement partagés à travers Instagram. Instagram dans la tempête, les usagers en colère. Panique sur Instagram. Instagram va-t-il commercialiser les photos de ses membres sans leur accord?
Hier, si l’on en croyait la rumeur sur les réseaux sociaux et son écho sur les sites de presse, c’était sûr et certain: Instagram vend vos photos au kilo. Les plus perspicaces évoquaient le “suicide d’Instagram“, les plus malins diffusaient sans attendre des conseils pour fermer son compte et récupérer ses photos. Et jusque sur le blog du très malpoli Frozen Piglet, chacun de répéter le mantra: “si c’est gratuit, c’est que c’est toi le produit”. Un psychodrame désormais classique, suscité comme d’habitude par une modification des CGU (conditions générales d’utilisation), auxquelles personne ne fait d’habitude attention. Sauf Wired et quelques blogueurs technophiles spécialisés dans le lancement d’alerte qui fait boum et garantit une viralité maximale. Instagram Addresses Terms of Service Rage.
The reversal filter.
Photo: Roberto Baldwin/Wired Instagram won’t be selling your food photos to Denny’s after all. The popular photo-sharing site made an abrupt about-face on Tuesday and said it will remove a portion of its updated terms of service that would have allowed Instagram to use your photographs, likeness, photo metadata (location information) and screen name to generate revenue from third-party businesses and “other entities” without your permission, or even telling you about it. Specifically, the TOS announced Monday stated: Some or all of the Service may be supported by advertising revenue. You acknowledge that we may not always identify paid services, sponsored content, or commercial communications as such.
This did not sit well with, well, anyone. “It was interpreted by many that we were going to sell your photos to others without any compensation,” company co-founder Kevin Systrom wrote in the post. That they did.