Instagram changes terms to ‘sell’ user photos; then changes back

[photo.net_industry_news]

<p>As one of my favorite authors John Scalzi put it: “You know, for once it would be lovely if a tech company could update its Terms Of Service so it DOESN’T have to backtrack on it after people freak out.”<br>

As you likely heard, leading online image sharing site <strong>Instagram</strong>, now a subsidiary of <strong>Facebook</strong>, changed its ToS yesterday, and everyone with a blog page or Twitter account was up in arms about it, as if Instagram was going to start profiting by reselling your small, square blurry, filtered photo of your breakfast… The only resort was to download all of your Instagram photos and delete your account, and many a site published tutorials on how to do just that.<br>

Facing such an uprising, the company’s CEO posted a “clarification” of the changes before even a full day had passed, emphasizing that no, Instagram would not resell its members’ pictures.<br>

[Reselling its member’s data is another matter, however, as is true of any free social service: as the saying goes, if you are not paying for an Internet service, than you are not the customer — advertisers are, and you are the product.]<br>

Instagram co-founder Kevin Systrom’s <a href="http://blog.instagram.com/post/38252135408/thank-you-and-were-listening">post here</a> admitted the first round of changes to the privacy policy and terms of service left “many users confused and upset about what the changes mean.”<br>

However, he also makes it clear “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.”<br>

And to deflect criticism that Instagram would use member photos in ads, he merely says “We do not have plans for anything like this, and because of that we’re going to remove the language that raised the question.” That’s a far cry from flat-out stating they would not DO it… And while Systrom states “Instagram users own their content and Instagram does not claim any ownership rights over your photos,” critics note that the legal language may leave shooters with “ownership” but Instagram has enough usage rights and control of the photo that “ownership” is meaningless. Nonetheless, Systrom does conclude that “We respect that there are creative artists and hobbyists alike that pour their heart into creating beautiful photos, and we respect that your photos are your photos. Period.”</p>

<p>Source: <a href="http://pmanewsline.com/2012/12/18/instagram-changes-terms-to-sell-user-photos-then-changes-back/">http://pmanewsline.com/2012/12/18/instagram-changes-terms-to-sell-user-photos-then-changes-back/</a></p>