Trending Trademarks

Instagram’s About Face?

Posted by Kimberly Herman on December 21, 2012 at 5:29 AM

What a difference a day makes when it comes to Instagram’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. Late Monday evening, news broke that the popular photo-sharing and social networking service made changes that would enable the company to sell users’ photos and other data to third-party advertisers without giving notification, compensation or credit to its users.

While the ensuing public backlash prompted Instagram’s co-founder and CEO Kevin Systrom to publicly state “It is not our intention to sell your photos,” the picture remains blurry when it comes to the company’s true intent.

On Monday, Instagram updated its Terms of Service, scheduled to go into effect on January 16, 2013. The new provisions found in the “Rights” section change the way the company can share its users’ information and submissions with third-party advertisers. The two most notable changes that sparked public outrage state:

“To help us deliver interesting paid or sponsored content or promotions, you agree that a business may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata), and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you.”

“. . . you hereby grant to Instagram a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide license to use the Content that you post on or through the Service, except that you can control who can view certain of your Content and activities on the Service as described in the Service's Privacy Policy..."

As soon as CNET broke the story, disgruntled users responded in a flash. Instagram’s most followed user Kim Kardashian has already expressed her displeasure, tweeting “I really loved Instagram :-( I need to review this new policy. I don't think its fair.” She joins celebrities including Pink, LeBron James, Anderson Cooper, Seth Green, and Mia Farrow in threatening to cancel their accounts if Instagram doesn’t change its mind.

Although Systrom has not retracted the changed policies, he has published a blog post stating that “Instagram users own their content and Instagram does not claim any ownership rights over your photos” and admitting “the language we proposed also raised question about whether your photos can be part of an advertisement.” According to Systrom, the company’s main goal is to avoid “advertising banners….that would hurt the Instagram user experience” and “instead . . . create meaningful ways to help you discover interesting accounts and content while building a self-sustaining business at the same time.”

It remains to be seen whether users will accept Systrom’s mea culpa – not to mention the new polices – and continue to upload their photos and share information on Instagram. In the meantime, similar service providers should consider this a valuable lesson in taking users’ likely reactions into consideration before modifying their Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Read More

Topics: privacy, Infringement, Multimedia

Brand Protection and Privacy Policy

Posted by Kimberly Herman on November 1, 2012 at 10:06 AM

If I were to ask, “Would you rather be punched in the face or stabbed in the back?” I’m guessing that you would be hard pressed to answer because I’m seeking consent for something without providing a meaningful choice.

Read More

Topics: privacy, technology, Internet, Multimedia

About the Blog

Trending Trademarks provides comments and analysis on trademark issues affecting the fashion, high-tech, multimedia and consumer products industries.

Meet our Editors

Meet our Editors

Subscribe to Email Updates