the fine print on chrome is actually pretty scary.gameraSeptember 3 2008, 19:18:14 UTC
Their website claims that what I was talking about (sending your browsing data) and error reporting are separate functions that are turned off separately. Is this not implemented in the browser yet? (Which is not a criticism, just curiosity-- it's quite understandable, since this is a newly-released beta and all.)
Even with the ability to turn it off, I sort of feel that a company whose entire livelihood depends on user statistics and targeted advertising creating a browser whose default behavior is to harvest user browsing data and send it to their company (knowing that the majority of people will not know enough to turn that feature off) seems really, really dishonest to me. Like I said, interesting but not something I'd use before a non-Google code fork appeared. I really do appreciate and respect their decision to go open source with this code! That's classy, and I don't mean that ironically for once.
Besides that, the Terms and Conditions of use are pretty damn intrusive; by downloading Chrome, you agree to allow Google to update or modify the browser without your knowledge or consent (not new, but gosh, I'm not liking it when my open source software is as draconian as Windows in that regard), and worst of all, you agree to allow Google to use or sell any content you post using Chrome ("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.
11.2 You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.")
So, if I post my novel to LJ using Chrome, I have agreed to allow Google rights to it, including the right to sell it to other companies without my consent (since technically, by checking the "I agree" box and downloading Chrome, I have already given my consent!). No, thanks.
Re: the fine print on chrome is actually pretty scary.pontelonSeptember 3 2008, 19:55:40 UTC
Okay, so that is rather shady, I agree. But they do legally say that they can only use it "is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services." AIM actually has all rights to the same.
So yes, they have the right to what you post, but only in reference to Chrome. They can't sell your story to a publisher, since it does not affect Chrome.
Like I said, AIM already does this. I think it's shady, but nothing that will stop me from using the services. ((I still use Opera/Firefox a lot anyway, but just use Chrome for viewing and surfing while in WoW))
Re: the fine print on chrome is actually pretty scary.gameraSeptember 4 2008, 06:24:52 UTC
AIM and Chrome are apples and oranges. An instant messenger cannot be used as a framework for uploading large-scale creative works. A lot of people upload their copyrighted work to the internet; not a lot of people use AIM to do this. Comparing them is inherently flawed because they have entirely different purposes and limitations. (If another web browser or an FTP client has a similar clause, though, I'd be very interested to know.)
"Let's put up a collection of all the really cool things people do with Google software and charge advertisers for space on it!" Congratulations, you've just lost your ability to sell this content yourself because while you still have the rights, a reputable publisher is not going to touch your work with a ten-foot pole while Google has the irrevocable right to publish it whenever and however they want provided they can give a flimsy justification that it's promoting the service. First publication rights are a big deal.
As long as they can make a tenuous connection, they can sell it to someone else-- that's exactly what 11.2 says! They absolutely can sell my work to a publisher if I post it using Chrome; it's up to me to spend a ludicrous amount of money to take them to court and prove it wasn't promoting the service. Even if they wouldn't do it, the fact that they have the right to do it effectively ruins the chances of publishing that creative work in another venue.
A web browser having a clause like that is more than shady. Sure, other services use clauses like that, but not the programs you use to upload content to unrelated sites. Google claiming to have rights to what you post using Chrome just because you used Chrome is the most ludicrous thing I have read in a long time.
"Provided that users leave on the auto-suggest feature in Chrome and have Google as their default search provider, Google has the right to store any information typed into Chrome's Ominibox, which serves as both search bar and address bar. The software maker told CNET News it plans to store about 2 percent of all such data, along with the IP address of the computer that entered the information."
Still weird, but as a company that makes it's lively hood on gathering information about what sites are bad, and what are good, knowing what sites people go to(with an optional feature) is good. And google already keeps track of google searches(duh) anyway.
Even with the ability to turn it off, I sort of feel that a company whose entire livelihood depends on user statistics and targeted advertising creating a browser whose default behavior is to harvest user browsing data and send it to their company (knowing that the majority of people will not know enough to turn that feature off) seems really, really dishonest to me. Like I said, interesting but not something I'd use before a non-Google code fork appeared. I really do appreciate and respect their decision to go open source with this code! That's classy, and I don't mean that ironically for once.
Besides that, the Terms and Conditions of use are pretty damn intrusive; by downloading Chrome, you agree to allow Google to update or modify the browser without your knowledge or consent (not new, but gosh, I'm not liking it when my open source software is as draconian as Windows in that regard), and worst of all, you agree to allow Google to use or sell any content you post using Chrome ("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.
11.2 You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.")
So, if I post my novel to LJ using Chrome, I have agreed to allow Google rights to it, including the right to sell it to other companies without my consent (since technically, by checking the "I agree" box and downloading Chrome, I have already given my consent!). No, thanks.
Reply
So yes, they have the right to what you post, but only in reference to Chrome. They can't sell your story to a publisher, since it does not affect Chrome.
Like I said, AIM already does this. I think it's shady, but nothing that will stop me from using the services. ((I still use Opera/Firefox a lot anyway, but just use Chrome for viewing and surfing while in WoW))
Reply
"Let's put up a collection of all the really cool things people do with Google software and charge advertisers for space on it!" Congratulations, you've just lost your ability to sell this content yourself because while you still have the rights, a reputable publisher is not going to touch your work with a ten-foot pole while Google has the irrevocable right to publish it whenever and however they want provided they can give a flimsy justification that it's promoting the service. First publication rights are a big deal.
As long as they can make a tenuous connection, they can sell it to someone else-- that's exactly what 11.2 says! They absolutely can sell my work to a publisher if I post it using Chrome; it's up to me to spend a ludicrous amount of money to take them to court and prove it wasn't promoting the service. Even if they wouldn't do it, the fact that they have the right to do it effectively ruins the chances of publishing that creative work in another venue.
A web browser having a clause like that is more than shady. Sure, other services use clauses like that, but not the programs you use to upload content to unrelated sites. Google claiming to have rights to what you post using Chrome just because you used Chrome is the most ludicrous thing I have read in a long time.
Reply
So not even the lawyers read the UGLA...great...
Reply
Still weird, but as a company that makes it's lively hood on gathering information about what sites are bad, and what are good, knowing what sites people go to(with an optional feature) is good. And google already keeps track of google searches(duh) anyway.
Reply
Leave a comment