yeah but if you read through
those examples, you'll see they're all basically the same. They all get unlimited license to use your content. The only difference is that FB's wording is fecking awful, and clearly written by a lawyer who doesn't understand the softly, softly approach.
Because those other companies explicitly spell out that you retain copyright (which you also do with FBs new TOS), everyone thinks they're being dead nice about it. In reality, they're doing what they think they can get away with legally, and covering their own asses in the process. They're just smart enough to play the words around until it sounds like the user is the one getting the good deal.
(
Damocles wants no part of your debauchery, Wed 18 Feb 2009, 0:48,
Reply)