11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.
Google retains de facto "ownership" rights of my work?!?! This brazen faux pas was a smart protective legal measure by Googler attorneys to try to slip by the Internet watchdogs; however, blogsters were chattering within a heartbeat of its release and most consumers have professional or academic affiliations which confounds the online legal environment. If people thought net neutrality was problematic, consider the implications of "net control." Instead of regulated taxation of Web access, Internet service providers - namely Google - would have the right to compete in the promotion and alteration of most, if not all, online content to the extent that they could collectively dillute or convolute users' personal identities and the original nature of the authors production beyond reconciliation. They would, in fact, dictate Web terms.
Thankfully, there was an immediate revocation of this clause, and competition remains between service providers and not between service providers and Web contributors.
CNET noted that Chrome gives the browser control over advertising, traditionally the responsibility of website owners.
InformationWeek also provided some great points.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Share Your Thoughts