Article: Instagram can now sell your photos for ads

[quantum]

https://money.cnn.com/2012/12/18/technology/social/instagram-sell-photos/

It's all over the news here.  Glad I don't have an account with them.

[j_menz]

https://money.cnn.com/2012/12/18/technology/social/instagram-sell-photos/

It's all over the news here.  Glad I don't have an account with them.

Here too. Quite outrageous - no wonder Facebook shares tanked.

[faulty_damper]

Some of the revisions aren't even legal such as creating retroactive contracts with minors and violating copyright.  But on the bright side, doesn't it sound like FB wrote the ToU policy?  At least they're consistent.

[oxy60]

They'll still steal them or the idea behind the shot. If you get your own web site you can stuff your shots, audio and video there. Believe me there are people going over all the stuff on the those dump sites constantly looking for a fresh approach.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I remember I heard a story of this American family posting a picture on facebook, went to Europe for vacation and they saw their freaking pictures on a billboard.

That's pretty sick lol.

[oxy60]

That's true 100 times over. There is stealing going on at a level we can not imagine.

[lloyd_cdb]

First off, any image posted to an online repository is instantly public domain.  This doesn't necessarily apply to the issue at hand, but it is a concern involved with why people are reacting how they are, even though it really has nothing to do with this.  The reason this is even in the media is because Instagram's new ToU included a vaguely worded statement about this, that they say will be taken out and made more specific BEFORE they are enacted in the middle of January.

Honestly, most people have no idea what the hell they are talking about.  All their info is coming from whiners on facebook that are propagating ridiculous lies around the internet and confusing the hell out of people that don't bother actually looking it up.

You have MORE privacy on Instagram than similar companies like twitter and youtube if you choose to change your settings to "approve followers", because those photos are no longer public domain. Public domain comes into play in that anyone following you can use your photos however they damn well please as long as they don't specifically sell them (If your profile is public).  Instagram could also do this, but they stated they won't in their ToU. In regards to Instagram's policy on their own use of your content...

One of the statements is that "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." THIS DOES NOT MEAN THEY CAN OR WILL SELL YOUR PHOTOS.  What it means is that they can be paid by sponsors to promote your content within their website without notifying you. Even more fascinating is that... Instagram's existing terms specifically gives the company the right to "place such advertising and promotions on the Instagram Services or on, about, or in conjunction with your Content". Which means... they already had this policy in their ToU.  The word change gave people the impression that they would sell it outside the site, but stated that isn't the intention.  It seems like they changed it for the last part: "without compensation to you".  Which is exactly what Facebook has been doing for ages.  What it probably points to is that that they may change their timeline so it's not based on time, but instead based on promoted content, exactly how facebook does it.

Lastly, 3 days ago they stated that they had no intention to sell users' photos or allow them to be used in advertisements promoting the website, and added that they will rework the language of the ToU to be more specific BEFORE it is put into a month from now.

The owner of Instagram in a public release days ago:

"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. ...
The language we proposed also raised question about whether your photos can be part of an advertisement. We do not have plans for anything like this and because of that we’re going to remove the language that raised the question."
 
One issue that hasn't been addressed is that they stated they have no control of third party applications (just like anyone else) and that if you give access to these third party applications, they are not responsible if your content becomes publicly shared according to the third parties ToU.  This is a common legal safety net, but the major issue is that they have also stated that they don't need to identify the third party applications.  This means you could sign up for some other random website accidentally that could be impersonating Instagram, and that now can use your Instagram photos however they damn well please. i.e. a company like Followgram This is actually a serious issue and one that people SHOULD be addressing.  But congrats to the overreacting media for putting the wrong issue on display, as usual.

EDIT: BTW, Followgram is a legitimate site allowing access to Instagram outside of a mobile device and not solely limited to access through facebook.  You need to have an Instagram account, and it's essentially Instagram without being technically associated. It doesn't need to follow Instagram's ToU, which gives the potential to confuse people.