Instagram says it now has the right to sell your photos

[HS Cult Leader]

Instagram says it now has the right to sell your photos

In its first big policy shift since Facebook bought the photo-sharing site, Instagram claims the right to sell users' photos without payment or notification. Oh, and there's no way to opt out.

by Declan McCullagh
December 17, 2012 9:54 PM PST



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. One irked Twitter user quipped that "Instagram is now the new iStockPhoto, except they won't have to pay you anything to use your images."
"It's asking people to agree to unspecified future commercial use of their photos," says Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "That makes it challenging for someone to give informed consent to that deal."
That means that a hotel in Hawaii, for instance, could write a check to Facebook to license photos taken at its resort and use them on its Web site, in TV ads, in glossy brochures, and so on -- without paying any money to the Instagram user who took the photo. The language would include not only photos of picturesque sunsets on Waikiki, but also images of young children frolicking on the beach, a result that parents might not expect, and which could trigger state privacy laws.
Facebook did not respond to repeated queries from CNET this afternoon. We'll update the article if we receive a response.

Continued.............. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57...l-your-photos/

[stripes]

facebook looking for revenue by throwing instagram under the bus...could be worse zuckerburg, you could be groupon

[Brokenbad]

Howard's pictures never had anything to worry about.

[fccstandards]

They snuck this by a few months ago. I remember hearing about it.

[newcastlefan]

i think Facebook would want to reconsider such decisions. Europe basically already told FB to fuck their privacy policies; their courts would love another opportunity to run through FB's Dublin bank accounts.

[StRyDeRxX]

Looks like Instagram is changing their tune now.

http://allthingsd.com/20121218/insta...iet-angry-mob/

[renchfrieswith]

I always wondered how they thought they were going to make back that one BILLION they paid for Instagram.

[fccstandards]

I always wondered how they thought they were going to make back that one BILLION they paid for Instagram.

No watermarks on pics from celebs. Genious move Zuckerberg.