Instagram Hit with Class Action Lawsuit

18

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

GreenTurtle

deleted my account the day that was released... not going back...

avatar

Zoandar

The true nature of "cloud storage" rears its ugly profit-mongering head. Too bad no one was ever warned.............:/

avatar

gatorXXX

Any company that produce something either for a fee or for free to a consumer has the right to write an agreement for you to follow. They can set any term they wish. If you like it, then you purchase or subscribe and if not, then you move on your merry way. That simple.

But I'm going to digress here a little. These companies take for granted that you don't read the EULA (or any type of agreement) because they make it so hideously long and most of it is legal mumbo jumbo that it takes a team of lawyers to decipher. They do this on purpose folks and it's a shady practice.

But then again, instagram is a free service such like facebook. They are offering you this service fee free to users and honestly....asking so little in return. My opinion is that you read the agreement and make a decision as to whether you want to use it or not. Your choice.

avatar

RUSENSITIVESWEETNESS

Requiring you to sacrifice your privacy and ownership of your own property hardly makes for a "free" service, you blithe twit.

"Asking so little in return." What a fucking joke. Seriously, every time these companies start to take a little heat in the press, armies of PR monkeys spring to their defense.

Damage control flying monkeys.

avatar

Euphoric

Again, if you're a new user read the ToS before you make an account - especially the Proprietary Rights in Content on Instagram section.

If you already have an account and have pictures posted - guess what, you already agreed to those terms, as well as the term that says they can change their policies at ANY time.

If you don't like it, don't use it - simple as that. This is nothing new or earth-shattering. Find an alternative, or if you're that worried about your nudies then maybe you have to find a different, more secure solution for hosting instead of relying on companies offering you to use their servers and bandwidth for free eh?

avatar

dgrmouse

You're a fool. This kind of access agreement isn't limited to free services, and really - the fact that the service is free doesn't in any way affect the argument at hand. With the kind of apathy - and even misguided support - being shown to pathetic companies like these, how long do you think it will be until EVERY service has equally ridiculous access agreements?

avatar

sticky66

If they win, maybe they will get a year of free service or something.....oh wait

avatar

Happy

Notice how this odious ToS change only happened after Facebook acquired Instagram. Facebook is practically the Devil and I hope this wakes people up to that fact.

avatar

tekknyne

+1. companies really take advantage of their users' data and its not to benefit you or I.

avatar

AngledVision

I think this call for a bazinga. BAZINGA!

avatar

Ryu

I don't see much coming out of the lawsuit. Instagram is hardly the first to try and lay claim to the content it hosts, but that's why you read TOS's. If you don't agree with it, just say so and they can't use your material. You can't use their services either, but that's fair. There's always more hosting solutions. If I'm reading this correctly the lawsuit is in retaliation to a completely legal (though unpleasant and an obvious "money-grab") TOS change (with proper notification et al) that was taken back before it even went into effect because Instagram actually listened to its user-base (which is rare for online companies nowadays).

EDIT: Not to mention it's a business, so it can't really be faulted for trying to make more money. Was the idea short-sighted? Probably. Did they ignore their users and keep it? No.

avatar

dgrmouse

You're being to generous with your opinion on their ToS. Many such "agreements" have clauses which state that the agreement is subject to change at any time, with only a provision that a new agreement is available somewhere (but it is your responsibility to become aware, even without notification).

Apathy like yours has allowed these absurd licensing strategies to pervade all manner of industry - I recently had my dentist present me with a "Patient Bill of Rights" which looked suspiciously like a software EULA (waver for everything, basically - with clauses that suggest possible future changes yet requiring agreement in perpetuity). Unacceptable.

Ryu said, "Not to mention it's a business, so it can't really be faulted for trying to make more money."

This is just plain stupid. Unethical behavior doesn't somehow magically become OK when it is perpetrated by a corporate entity or in the name of business. What's wrong with you?

avatar

Euphoric

Unethical? Last time I checked it was a FREE service. If you don't like their ToS changes, it's pretty simple - cancel your account or don't use it in the first place. No one is forcing people to use them, and there are plenty of replacement services. And you are correct, "Many such "agreements" have clauses which state that the agreement is subject to change at any time"...So I really fail to see the issue here. If it was something you had to actually PAY a subscription for, then yes - I'd be upset also - but then again, I would've agreed to the ToS saying they could make changes at will before I plunked down my CC number.
The lawsuit is a joke, brought on by the tears of the entitled armchair techies of the world, that don't read agreements before hitting that Accept button, think that everything should be given to them free - and then whine later on when something like this happens.

avatar

dgrmouse

@Euphoric: I see this argument a lot, and it's total fallacy. That something is offered for free doesn't mean that it doesn't need to meet certain standards. And those who expect standards to be upheld aren't necessarily suffering from entitlement issues.

That the service was available for free is not at issue.

Euphoric said, "I really fail to see the issue here." That's the truth. Instagram decided that they were going to turn folks' photo collections into royalty-free stock photos, and you're being a jerk for blaming the victims.

avatar

Euphoric

@dgrmouse

"That the service was available for free is not at issue."

How exactly is this not at issue? Read the ToS would you, even in it's current state it states they can use any content you do not have set to "private", which EVERYONE that has an account has already blindly (apparantly) agreed to.

You are utilizing their servers and bandwidth for free to host your apparently "precious" images, AND you agreed to their use already AND agreed to letting them change their ToS at ANY time. How are you literally this dense?

Not even worth the time it takes to type this actually.

avatar

Ryu

I'm not entirely sure as to why you're speaking as if there were victims from this. It was trashed as soon as people said they didn't like it.

I also have to ask why one is classified as a "jerk" for saying that you should read a contract before you say you agree to it. If there's a proposed change or a change that hasn't gone into effect yet that many people would not agree with should they have read it, for any n number of people who don't read the TOS there is a blog post spreading like wildfire about the contents of the change.

Do I always read the TOS? No. But you don't have to read the entire TOS to understand what's going on. All you have to do is find the service-specific sections which are usually really short. If I agreed to some terms and got bit back for not reading them, then I would blame myself instantly. It was my fault for blindly agreeing to a contract. Does that take all responsibility away from the writers of said contract? No. Have there been people screwed because of a hidden clause within a contract? Definitely. It happens far too often.

Now, if they decided to keep the TOS change and made it inexplicably difficult to cancel the service then that would be completely crooked. The evidence shows otherwise though, as they redacted the change.

avatar

dgrmouse

I hope you enjoy good health, truly. But if you find yourself in need of a specialist or a new GP anytime soon, you're apt to be handed a form regarding patient privacy rights with similar clauses (right to change terms at any time, complete indemnity, etc). How would you feel if these expressly reserved rights were exercised, and your medical history were posted on Facebook? Sure, you can read and refuse the ToS (and in many cases, sympathetic staff will still treat you), but when EVERY doctor/dentist/surgeon/chiropractor/etc uses what is essentially the same agreement, what choice do you really have?

As another example, many banking organizations (including BoA, Wells Fargo, Paypal, Susquehana, and others) have responded to changes in the Truth in Savings and Electronic Fund Transfer acts by instituting insane electronic communication clauses. If you give any electronic contact information (e.g. e-mail) - often required to access online functionality - then you must in most cases agree to allow your banking institution to send (without limitation) financial information to your e-mail (and possibly any other electronic service that they can link to your e-mail, i.e. Facebook). This is stupid. Snail-mail is relatively speedy, accessible, and protected by law. E-mail, on the other hand, is VERY insecure. Since every bank I can find has similar terms, I don't think you can reasonably wag a finger at a disgruntled user and say, "you should've read the TOS before agreeing to them."

Euphoric said, "If you don't like it, don't use it - simple as that. This is nothing new or earth-shattering. Find an alternative"

I hope that you're able to see the flaws in your reasoning before you find yourself in dire need of services without reasonable TOS.

avatar

whr4usa

+1

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.